IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

DOJ files suit against Apple, saying it's tried to monopolize the smartphone market

The Justice Department, along with attorneys general for 15 states and D.C., allege that Apple makes its products "worse for consumers" to hinder competition.

By

The Department of Justice filed a landmark lawsuit against Apple on Thursday, accusing the tech company of hindering its products' competition in violation of federal antitrust laws.

The 88-page lawsuit, joined by attorneys general for 15 states and the District of Columbia, singles out Apple's signature product, the iPhone, and alleges that the company "repeatedly chooses to make its products worse for consumers to prevent competition from emerging."

Apple, the lawsuit claims, imposes "a series of shapeshifting rules and restrictions" on apps that allow the company to "extract higher fees, thwart innovation, offer a less secure or degraded user experience, and throttle competitive alternatives."

Such conduct has had ramifications on industries outside the smartphone market, including financial services, gaming, news media and social media, the lawsuit argues. "Unless Apple’s anticompetitive and exclusionary conduct is stopped, it will likely extend and entrench its iPhone monopoly to other markets and parts of the economy."

Apple has denied wrongdoing, saying in a statement to NBC News that the company will “vigorously defend” itself against the allegations.

The lawsuit was not unexpected. The New York Times reported in January that the department was nearing the end of its antitrust investigation into Apple. And the Biden administration's Big Tech antitrust crackdown has seen the Justice Department file lawsuits against Google and the Federal Trade Commission bring similar anti-monopoly cases against Meta and Amazon.

"If successful, [the lawsuit] would hinder our ability to create the kind of technology people expect from Apple — where hardware, software, and services intersect," a company spokesperson said. "It would also set a dangerous precedent, empowering government to take a heavy hand in designing people’s technology."