The United States Supreme Court's single antitrust case of
the 2019 term, Apple, Inc v Pepper, 1 considered and
upheld the long-standing and often criticized direct purchaser rule
established by Hanover Shoe v United Shoe Machinery Co 2
and Illinois Brick Co v Illinois, which limited standing under
Clayton Act section 4 to 'the overcharged direct purchaser, and
not others in the chain of manufacture or
distribution.'3
Background of the case
On 29 December 2011, several iPhone owners sued Apple, Inc
(Apple) in federal court on behalf of a class consisting of
'all persons in the United States . . . who purchased an iPhone
application or application license from Apple for use on an iPhone
at any time from December 29, 2007 through the
present.'4 The plaintiffs alleged that Apple
illegally monopolized the iPhone application (app) aftermarket,
comprising 'the market for distributing software applications
that can be downloaded on the iPhone for managing such functions