CASE COMMENTS: EUROPEAN AND INTERNATIONAL LAW – UNITED STATES – PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT – STANDING TO SUE – MONOPOLIZATION

US: The US Supreme Court rules that mobile Apps users are direct buyers and have standing to sue the platform that distributes them (Apple / Pepper)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. The news of the quarter in U.S. antitrust law is undoubtedly marked by the case of Apple Inc. v. Pepper (587 U.S., 2019). In a decision handed down on May 13, 2019, the United States Supreme Court was called upon to rule on the question of whether iPhone users could act on the basis of the Sherman Act to challenge Apple's monopoly on the market for applications that use the trademark. More specifically, the question was related to the Illinois Brick case law, which indicates that only the direct purchaser has standing in antitrust litigation. In this decision, the Supreme Court decided that iPhones users are indeed direct purchasers and therefore have

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

Quotation

Jean-Christophe Roda, US: The US Supreme Court rules that mobile Apps users are direct buyers and have standing to sue the platform that distributes them (Apple / Pepper), 13 May 2019, Concurrences N° 3-2019, Art. N° 91607, pp. 208-211

Visites 351

All reviews