The Northern District Court of California accepted the case earlierA class action lawsuit, accusing Apple's wallet service of monopoly. The reason is that the NFC function behind Apple's wallet service is not open to other wallet services, and even only allows iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch to use it, giving Apple a greater advantage in mobile payments.
However, although Judge Jeffrey White, who presided over this lawsuit, agreed that payment by scanning QR codes is not more convenient than Apple Pay, and also agreed that the cost of switching payment methods is relatively high, he believed that Apple did not force consumers to use its wallet service and Apple Pay function. At the same time, this service is provided free of charge and does not involve any charges. Therefore, he believes that Apple's service does not involve monopoly.
However, the high fees Apple charges for mobile payment transactions, coupled with the fact that its NFC function is not open to third-party wallet services, clearly affect market competition. In particular, the European Union's 2022 ruling found that Apple did not provide equal access to its NFC function to other services, thus concluding that Apple violated market monopoly regulations.
In addition to Apple Pay, Samsung has also integrated Samsung Pay into its phones, which also utilizes NFC. However, Samsung has not been accused of monopoly because even if consumers do not use Samsung Pay, they can still use Google Pay on Android phones, which also allows for tap-and-go payments.
In contrast, although Apple allows developers to access the NFC function of devices such as the iPhone under certain circumstances, it is currently rare to see third-party payment services using the NFC of hardware such as the iPhone for contactless payments.
The lawsuit is expected to be argued in court at 12 a.m. Pacific time on December 1.
