# The US Department of Justice sues Apple for monopolising smartphones

Date: 2024

## The fact

On 21 March 2024 the [US Department of Justice](/organizations/us-department-of-justice) and 16 states sued Apple for monopolising the smartphone market, a completed complaint under Cook.

## Context

Neighbouring Epic 2020 is the private docket. Neighbouring DMA 2023 is the EU analogue. He did not write the Sherman Act.

Epic 2020 is neighbouring private suit. DMA 2023 is neighbouring EU listing.

[Tim Cook](/people/tim-cook) has been Apple CEO since 24 August 2011. He does not write a DOJ complaint, a Commission DMA decision, an Irish Finance Act, or a Chinese Cyberspace Administration rule. Steve Jobs is a different, dead person. A product launch is not a labour statute. A privacy keynote is not a completed DMA compliance certificate. Keep those dates separate. A 10-K climate page is not a unique ppm. An assembler audit is not a unique suicide count as his personal tally. A DMA listing is not a completed sideload world. A DOJ complaint is not a breakup. TSMC fabricates; Foxconn assembles; App Review enforces.

## Evidence and sources

United States Department of Justice carries the official instrument or communique. Reuters records the same dated act independently.

## Significance

The path is [antitrust-pressure-in-digital-markets](/drivers/antitrust-pressure-in-digital-markets): a completed DOJ monopolisation complaint is an accountability instrument on the iPhone stack. A complaint is not a verdict.

## What is established and what is not

Established: 21 March 2024 DOJ complaint, independently reported.

Not established: that a court had already broken Apple up, or a unique later ASP coefficient from the press room.

What would change the picture: a contradictory original with a different date or name, a later repeal, a court that vacated the instrument, or a measured series that can be argued, with lag and alternatives, as a consequence of this instrument rather than of later institutions.

The date is the date of this instrument, not a licence to back-date every later harm or benefit.

DOJ sued. States joined. Courts will sit. He did not sit as the judge.. A later repeal, court stay, or successor order would be a different Fact with a different date. That pair identifies The US Department of Justice sues Apple for monopolising smartphones, not a later speech about The US Department of Justice sues Apple for monopolising smartphones.

Co-authors and later implementers named in Context remain on the file. The US Department of Justice sues Apple for monopolising smartphones on 2024-03-21 is not a licence to treat every later United States Department of Justice communique as this same act. If a later repeal, stay, or successor instrument exists, it needs its own date and its own row. This dossier refuses to average The US Department of Justice sues Apple for monopolising smartphones into a personality. The contribution described on this Person row is limited to He was CEO of the defendant. DOJ sued. States joined. Courts will sit. He did not sit as the judge. That limit is the alternative to treating office-holding as authorship of every later series.

## People

- Tim Cook: https://factrail.ai/people/tim-cook

## Drivers

- Antitrust Pressure in Digital Markets: https://factrail.ai/drivers/antitrust-pressure-in-digital-markets
- Digital-Platform Power Concentration: https://factrail.ai/drivers/digital-platform-power-concentration

## Sources

- https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-doj-sues-apple-smartphone-monopoly-2024-03-21/
- https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-apple-monopolizing-smartphone-markets

## Methodology

https://factrail.ai/methodology

Canonical: https://factrail.ai/facts/aapl-doj-2024