Besides Epic (since they are an actual exception), how do they forbid you from taking app store customers to a 3rd party? As for the 2nd thing, I don't see the problem at all. If you walk into a supermarket, you can't just demand that they sell your product. It's their marketplace - it's their right to say what can and can't go in it (within reason). Sure, but it's kinda a stretch to say they're a monopoly as a whole just because of payment. Y'know this court case is held in the US, right? This is based on US law. That being said, the contract isn't "obviously disadvantageous" or else nobody would agree to it and Apple would have been sued a while ago. The contract is stupid but developers still set a net gain. Yes, actually, you can start an app shop on iOS. Epic even did it, until they broke the rules. Even if you couldn't, that would be deemed anticompetitive, not a monopoly. I don't know why so many people here don't know the difference. All monopolies are anticompetitive, but you can be anticompetitive without being a monopoly. Apple is not a monopoly of apps. Yes, it absolutely is, and I can't comprehend how you would think otherwise. Nobody depends on iOS. Of apps that are only available for iOS, that was a conscious decision, as opposed to being a requirement. If people had no choice but to go with Apple (in conjunction with their other business practices), then they would be a monopoly. Otherwise, Apple is basically just an elitist club. Yes, you are definitely right with those 2 examples. See my comment to Loobylugs about this.