Plaintiffs Hit An Illinois Brick Wall: Indirect Purchasers Of IPhone Apps Lack Standing To Bring Antitrust Suit

On December 2, 2013, United States District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the Northern District of California dismissed a case against Apple brought by a putative class of consumers who purchased applications from the App Store claiming that Apple's 30 percent commission violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act.  Judge Gonzalez Rogers held that the consumers were indirect purchasers barred from bringing suit under Illinois Brick and dismissed the case with prejudice.  In re Apple iPhone Antitrust Litigation, No. 11-cv-06714-YGR (N.D. Cal December 2, 2013).

The purported class argued that Apple monopolized the aftermarket for iPhone applications by collecting a 30 percent commission on all apps sold by independent developers in its virtual store.  Applications for the iPhone are only available in the Apple App Store, and many of them are made by independent developers and then vetted by Apple.  When apps are sold, the developers keep 70 percent of the proceeds, while