Apple is being sued by the US for employing a strategy that relies on exclusionary anticompetitive conduct that hurts both consumers and developers. The 88-page lawsuit says that the company violated antitrust laws with practices that were intended to keep customers reliant on their iPhones and make them less likely to switch to competing devices. It seeks to put an end to those practices and possibly a breakup of the company. The lawsuit is likely to drag out for years before any type of resolution.

An antitrust lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice against Apple may result in significant changes to the iOS experience. There might be some similarities with what happened after the company had to conform to the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA) in promoting its services, running its App Store, and handling contactless payments. The main changes in the EU include adding options for downloading apps from other app stores inside iOS and more web browsing options besides Safari.

Yelp has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google, accusing the company of using its search engine monopoly to promote its own local search services and reviews over competitors. The lawsuit claims that Google's practices have diminished Yelp's visibility and revenue by keeping users within Google's ecosystem.

Epic Games has initiated a new antitrust lawsuit against Google and Samsung, alleging that the two companies are colluding to suppress competition from third-party app stores. This lawsuit follows Epic's previous legal victory against Google, where a jury found that Google maintained an illegal monopoly over app distribution on its platform. The core of the current lawsuit centers around Samsung's "Auto Blocker" feature, which is enabled by default on new Samsung devices. This feature restricts users from installing apps unless they come from "authorized sources," which Epic claims effectively limits installations to Google and Samsung's own app stores. Epic argues that there is no clear process for other app stores to gain this "authorized" status, thereby stifling competition. Epic's CEO, Tim Sweeney, contends that the Auto Blocker is not genuinely designed to protect users from malware, as it does not assess the safety of apps before blocking installations. Instead, he argues that it is a tool to prevent competition. Sweeney has expressed concerns about the difficulty users face in disabling the Auto Blocker, claiming it requires an unnecessarily complicated process that discourages users from installing alternative app stores. In response, Samsung and Google have denied any collusion regarding the Auto Blocker feature. Google has stated that it did not request Samsung to create this feature, emphasizing that Android allows for sideloading apps and that device manufacturers are free to implement their own safety measures. Samsung has also defended the Auto Blocker, asserting that it is designed to enhance user security and that users can easily disable it during the initial setup of their devices. Epic's lawsuit seeks a jury trial, and the outcome may be influenced by ongoing legal proceedings from its previous case against Google. The company aims to prevent what it perceives as a "malicious compliance strategy" from Google and its partners, which could further hinder competition in the app distribution market. As the legal battle unfolds, Epic remains vigilant about potential barriers to third-party app stores, with Sweeney indicating that they are closely monitoring the situation.