The curious case of Epic Games: how the developer beat Google but not Apple
www.theguardian.com
The Fortnite maker filed antitrust suits against both tech companies – while one emerged victorious, the other was found at fault on 11 claims

“Google has taken great pains to appear more open than Apple, licensing the Android operating system to third parties like Samsung and allowing users to install apps via other methods than the Play store. Apple does neither. When it comes to exclusivity, Apple has become synonymous with “walled garden” in the public imagination. So why did a jury find that Google held a monopoly but Apple didn’t?”

  • Serinus@lemmy.worldEnglish
    42·
    11 months ago

    “The big difference between Apple and Google is Apple didn’t write anything down,” Sweeney said

    • 5200@lemmy.worldEnglish
      8·
      11 months ago

      Many companies have already implemented aggressive email “retention” policies, where only specifically tagged and marked emails can be saved in a system that will periodically require the user to verify if it is still required. All other emails get purged.

      This to avoid years old emails surfacing in those nuisance lawsuits and prove the company willingly did illegal things.

      • Serinus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        11 months ago

        Yes, but when a court order to retain documents comes down, the legal department of those companies knows how to do so.

        • 5200@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          11 months ago

          Sure, the legal hold will be implemented so no new emails will be deleted that meet the requirements. But anything already gone is gone, so no getting bit in the ass by 5 year old mails… is the idea.

          • Serinus@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            11 months ago

            Yes, this situation just doesn’t fit that bill. They kept the purge in place after the court order, otherwise they’d be fine.

            • 5200@lemmy.worldEnglish
              4·
              11 months ago

              oh, my apologies, I wasn’t commenting on this specific case. I was more adding content in general.

              The fact that a company actively purges relevant data they where supposed to retain, should automatically lead to the inference that the data was “the most damning possible” and take it from there.