I’ve been mulling over this idea that has been postulated amidst the Psystar dust-up regarding the idea that Apple’s EULA restrictions could constitute a monopoly. I’ve come to the conclusion that it cannot. The definition of the word ‘Monopoly’ yields many clues to how this is possible:

mo•nop•o•ly

n. pl. mo·nop·o·lies Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: “Monopoly frequently … arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals” (Milton Friedman). Law A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party. A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity. A commodity or service so controlled. Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly. Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly

Somehow, I just don’t see how Apple’s EULA falls into this definition.Apple doesn’t, by any stretch of the imagination, own the personal computer market. Back in the 80’s and early 90’s it may have been considered to have owned the personal and education markets, but even then Apple didn’t control corporate markets. In fact, estimates both liberal and conservative, peg Apple’s marketshare at around 5-15%. This doesn’t even fall into Microsoft’s radar for threat control.

Apple owns both its hardware designs and its operating system, Mac OS X. Apple even open sourced the core, dubbed Darwin, and the Darwin elements of certain server programs so they could have a significant foot into the FOSS community. They do not, however, open source anything else. It is well known that Apple controls everything which is customer facing in any way. If Apple controls it, they can guarantee quality.

This hasn’t worked out for them in terms of the iPhone, though. Steve Jobs somehow is able to see the writing on the wall and modify how Apple does things before they become issues. Thus, we have the iPhone SDK available which will allow developers (any developers, mind you) to create fully fledged applications for the popular handset. This is a pretty open methodology for a monopoly, is it not?

So, tell me how I’m wrong and how Apple can actually be a monopoly. I’m interested in all arguments, either for or against.

Source material for our definition of the word “Monopoly” came from these kind entities:

American Psychological Association (APA):

monopoly. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monopoly

Chicago Manual Style (CMS):

monopoly. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monopoly (accessed: April 16, 2008).

Modern Language Association (MLA):

“monopoly.” The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 16 Apr. 2008. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monopoly>.

written by Tyler Regas