Apple could be held liable for how it runs its App Store. Apple typically takes a 30% cut from every app and service sold there, and Robert Pepper, the lead plaintiff for a class action, claims the company’s anti-competitive practices are hurting consumers like him.

…Delivering the majority opinion for the court, Kavanaugh wrote that Apple can be sued by its customers “on a monopoly theory.” That’s pretty standard: when a company, facing little competition, uses its market position to raise the prices of its products, it can be in violation of laws aimed at promoting competition and the well-being of consumers.

…Apple could also be sued by app developers, most of whom are forced to fork over a big percentage of their potential revenue, “on a monopsony theory.”

…The question Robinson sought to answer was: what happens when markets aren’t really competitive?

…The term “monopoly,” which is derived from Ancient Greek, had long been used to describe the power a company had when it was the single seller of something. She wanted to name its inverse — the power a firm had when it was the single buyer of something.

…Companies buy labor from workers, and when they have this power, they’re able to lower the wages they pay. Workers may have to settle because they don’t have alternatives. 

…And, as the Supreme Court has just acknowledged, Apple might be profiting from its monopsony power in the app market. In this argument, the company is effectively the sole buyer of Apple-compatible apps and services, which allows them to set their fee as high as they want. It is currently 30 percent. There is no alternative if you’re an app developer who wants to sell to iPhone and iPad users.

Apple’s Scary Buying Power And The Woman Who Named It : Planet Money : NPR

hmmmm