Apple Iphone - Article 102(B) TFEU

Dylan123

If there was evidence to suggest that Apple limited production of the Iphone - which placed them at a competitive advantage over Nokia due to the false impression that the Iphone sold out all the time..... Would or could this breach 102 b of the TFEU (ex art 82 EC) and what would the consequences be?

maidhc

Not being smart, but the answer would be that Nokia, by selling below par equipment, put itself at a competitive disadvantage to Apple!

Apple in any event are very much a niche mobile phone company, and far from being in a dominant position, with only a fraction of sales and a declining share of the smartphone market to Android. Nokia don't even have a credible competitior to the iPhone, and I say this as the owner of a Nokia N97, and are not in the same market at all IMO.

Dylan123

Nokia is a poor comparison today (re: sales) to use when applying the law. Lets take Android as a comparable.

We have:
(1) Similar market???? Android is predominantly the Asia Pacific
(2) Interchangeable products
(3) Substituitionality
(4) Cross elasticity

(1) Apple are responsible for the limitation of sales (if they restricted them..theoretically speaking)
(2) Do they enjoy a dominant position - well in Ireland and the Uk i would say most likely.
(3) Have they abused that dominant position by limiting production to the prejudice of consumers.

My difficulty is understanding the following:
(1) Could there be a breach of art 102 (B) (Ex art 82 TEC) and if not on what grounds?

(2) If a company wants to limit production to make a product more special/ elite; is that prejudice of the customer and are we looking at the intention of the company?

FreudianSlippers

Dylan123 wrote: »

Nokia is a poor comparison today (re: sales) to use when applying the law. Lets take Android as a comparable.

We have:
(1) Similar market???? Android is predominantly the Asia Pacific
(2) Interchangeable products
(3) Substituitionality
(4) Cross elasticity

(1) Apple are responsible for the limitation of sales (if they restricted them..theoretically speaking)
(2) Do they enjoy a dominant position - well in Ireland and the Uk i would say most likely.
(3) Have they abused that dominant position by limiting production to the prejudice of consumers.

My difficulty is understanding the following:
(1) Could there be a breach of art 102 (B) (Ex art 82 TEC) and if not on what grounds?

(2) If a company wants to limit production to make a product more special/ elite; is that prejudice of the customer?

Is this a matter of proving the intention which is difficult?

Handset manufacturers ≠ Operating system creator

Dylan123

-Agreed poor comparable.
-How about android v ios or mac osx

drunkmonkey

Sorry for hi-Jacking this but while were on legal discussion about apple, how can they get away stating the iphone4 has only a 1yr warranty in Ireland when by law it should have 2 years like any Nokia or Sony. Surley this is a breach of consumer rights.

On the retarding stock, i'm not sure it's to apple's benifit as when the stores have no stock people were not prepared to wait and went for android phones, it's apples loss if anything.

Dylan123

The point is the application of article 102 (B) TFEU.

What would be a good example of this if Apple is not one.

Tom Young

Have a look at the Microsoft case.

seamus

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Sorry for hi-Jacking this but while were on legal discussion about apple, how can they get away stating the iphone4 has only a 1yr warranty in Ireland when by law it should have 2 years like any Nokia or Sony. Surley this is a breach of consumer rights.

A manufacturer warranty bears little or no relation to the legally implied warranty. Where the phone is bought from someone other than Apple, e.g. O2, then O2 are obliged to honour the EU 2-year warranty, not Apple.

Where the phone is bought from Apple direct, then Apple are obliged to honour the 2-year warranty, but this is distinct from their own 1-year warranty. Apple's standard warranty gives you phone support and they'll usually replace your phone no questions asked, extremely quickly, if it's faulty. Under the EU warranty you're not entitled to phone support and they don't have to stick to their usual turnaround times nor replace the phone if it can be repaired.