Apple Files Vigorous Response to DOJ Lawsuit: ’Threatens the Very Principles That Set iPhone Apart’

Chance Miller, 9to5Mac:

Apple has voiced its opposition to the case many times over the last year. Now, it has officially filed its answer to the DOJ’s antitrust complaint, pushing back forcefully against the allegations.

As a refresher, the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit focuses on five major aspects of the iPhone experience: super apps, cloud streaming games, third-party messaging apps, third-party smartwatches, and third-party digital wallets. In today’s filing, Apple says the DOJ “fundamentally misunderstands” those five things.

Apple outlines:

  • DOJ says Apple stifles the success of “super apps,” despite the fact that Apple’s rules allow and support such apps, and indeed a multitude of “super apps” exist on the App Store today.
  • DOJ says Apple blocks cloud streaming games, even though Apple allows streaming games both over the web and in the App Store where they can stream games directly to users.
  • DOJ says Apple degrades third-party messaging apps, even though they are widely available and enormously popular on iPhone already.
  • DOJ says Apple limits the functionality of third-party smartwatches, even though they can effectively pair with iPhone, share data to and from the iPhone via a companion app, and take advantage of certain functionalities Apple has developed, which are expanding over time.
  • DOJ says Apple withholds access to iPhone hardware necessary for third-party digital wallets to use tap-to-pay technology; however, Apple developed and provides a mechanism that protects user security.

One part of Apple’s defense that seems mostly proven already is that this industry moves fast and the competitive landscape is always changing. I’d say three of the DOJ’s five main arguments are already stale: Apple has since opened up cloud gaming; third-party messaging apps can now be set as default; and tap-to-pay has been opened up. And I think the other two points, on “super apps” and third-party connected devices like watches, are nonsense. Especially the “super apps” thing.

Miller, of course, embeds Apple’s full response at the bottom of his post. The argument is worth a read — it’s very cogently and plainly written.

★ Thursday, 31 July 2025