[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]1LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
We2PPwe
'll3MDwill
hear4VVhear
argument5NNargument
first6RBfirst
this7DTthis
morning8NNmorning
in9INin
Case10NPCase
17-20411CD@card@
,12,,
Apple13NPApple
versus14CCversus
Pepper15NPPepper
.16SENT.
Mr17NPMr
.18SENT.
Wall19NPWall
.20SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]21LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Thank22VVthank
you23PPyou
,24,,
Mr25NPMr
.26SENT.
Chief27NPChief
Justice28NPJustice
,29,,
and30CCand
may31MDmay
it32PPit
please33VVplease
the34DTthe
Court35NPCourt
:36::
The37DTthe
only38JJonly
damages39NNSdamage
theory40NNtheory
in41INin
this42DTthis
monopolization43NNmonopolization
action44NNaction
is45VBZbe
rooted46VVNroot
in47INin
a48DTa
3049CD@card@
percent50NNpercent
commission51NNcommission
that52IN/thatthat
Apple53NPApple
charges54NNScharge
app55NPApp
developers56NNSdeveloper
and57CCand
which58WDTwhich
allegedly59RBallegedly
causes60VVZcause
those61DTthose
developers62NNSdeveloper
to63TOto
increase64VVincrease
app65NPApp
prices66NNSprice
to67TOto
consumers68NNSconsumer
.69SENT.
The70DTthe
case71NNcase
is72VBZbe
barred73VVNbar
by74INby
the75DTthe
Court76NPCourt
's77POS's
Illinois78NPIllinois
Brick79NPBrick
doctrine80NNdoctrine
because81INbecause
the82DTthe
developers83NNSdeveloper
'84POS'
pricing85NNpricing
decisions86NNSdecision
are87VBPbe
necessarily88RBnecessarily
in89INin
the90DTthe
causal91JJcausal
chain92NNchain
that93WDTthat
links94VVZlink
the95DTthe
commission96NNcommission
to97TOto
any98DTany
consumer99NNconsumer
damages100NNSdamage
.101SENT.
If102INif
the103DTthe
commission104NNcommission
increases105VVZincrease
beyond106INbeyond
the107DTthe
competitive108JJcompetitive
level109NNlevel
,110,,
but111CCbut
apps112NNSapps
developers113NNSdeveloper
do114VVPdo
not115RBnot
change116VVchange
their117PP$their
apps118NNSapps
prices119NNSprice
,120,,
consumers121NNSconsumer
suffer122VVPsuffer
no123DTno
damages124NNSdamage
.125SENT.
And126CCand
if127INif
app128NPApp
developers129NNSdeveloper
do130VVPdo
change131VVchange
their132PP$their
prices133NNSprice
to134TOto
pass135VVpass
on136INon
some137DTsome
or138CCor
all139DTall
of140INof
the141DTthe
over-charge142NNover-charge
,143,,
well144RBwell
,145,,
that146WDTthat
is147VBZbe
precisely148RBprecisely
the149DTthe
kind150NNkind
of151INof
damages152NNSdamage
theory153NNtheory
that154IN/thatthat
the155DTthe
Illinois156NPIllinois
Brick157NPBrick
doctrine158NNdoctrine
prohibits159VVZprohibit
.160SENT.
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]161LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
Is162VBZbe
there163RBthere
any164DTany
...165:...
in166INin
...167:...
in168INin
your169PP$your
view170NNview
,171,,
is172VBZbe
there173RBthere
any174DTany
first175JJfirst
buyer176NNbuyer
in177INin
this178DTthis
picture179NNpicture
?180SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]181LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Excuse182NNexcuse
me183PPme
?184SENT?
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]185LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
Is186VBZbe
there187RBthere
any188DTany
first189JJfirst
buyer190NNbuyer
in191INin
this192DTthis
picture193NNpicture
?194SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]195LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Well196UHwell
,197,,
there198EXthere
's199VBZbe
...200:...
there201EXthere
's202VBZbe
two203CDtwo
different204JJdifferent
buyers205NNSbuyer
in206INin
this207DTthis
picture208NNpicture
.209SENT.
There210EXthere
are211VBPbe
the212DTthe
app213NPApp
developers214NNSdeveloper
who215WPwho
,216,,
by217INby
contract218NNcontract
with219INwith
Apple220NPApple
,221,,
are222VBPbe
buying223VVGbuy
a224DTa
package225NNpackage
of226INof
services227NNSservice
which228WDTwhich
include229VVPinclude
distribution230NNdistribution
and231CCand
software232NNsoftware
and233CCand
intellectual234JJintellectual
property235NNproperty
and236CCand
testing237NNtesting
and238CCand
...239:...
and240CCand
so241RBso
forth242RBforth
.243SENT.
And244CCand
then245RBthen
the246DTthe
plaintiffs247NNSplaintiff
in248INin
this249DTthis
case250NNcase
are251VBPbe
the252DTthe
...253:...
the254DTthe
buyer255NNbuyer
of256INof
the257DTthe
apps258NNSapps
themselves259PPthemselves
that260WDTthat
are261VBPbe
made262VVNmake
with263INwith
that264DTthat
package265NNpackage
of266INof
goods267NNSgood
and268CCand
services269NNSservice
and270CCand
...271:...
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]272LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
My273NPMy
...274:...
my275PP$my
question276NNquestion
was277VBDbe
within278INwithin
Illinois279NPIllinois
Brick280NPBrick
,281,,
is282VBZbe
there283RBthere
in284INin
this285DTthis
case286NNcase
anyone287NNanyone
who288WPwho
would289MDwould
qualify290VVqualify
as291INas
a292DTa
first293JJfirst
buyer294NNbuyer
with295INwith
standing296VVGstand
to297TOto
sue298VVsue
Apple299NPApple
?300SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]301LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
The302DTthe
developers303NNSdeveloper
,304,,
yes305UHyes
.306SENT.
Without307INwithout
a308DTa
doubt309NNdoubt
,310,,
the311DTthe
developers312NNSdeveloper
are313VBPbe
the314DTthe
ones315NNSone
who316WPwho
,317,,
in318INin
the319DTthe
first320JJfirst
instance321NNinstance
,322,,
pay323VVpay
the324DTthe
30325CD@card@
percent326NNpercent
commission327NNcommission
.328SENT.
I329PPI
think330VVPthink
it331PPit
's332VBZbe
...333:...
it334PPit
is335VBZbe
...336:...
it337PPit
is338VBZbe
important339JJimportant
to340TOto
root341VVroot
the342DTthe
analysis343NNanalysis
in344INin
the345DTthe
common346JJcommon
ground347NNground
,348,,
which349WDTwhich
has350VHZhave
been351VBNbe
conceded352VVNconcede
,353,,
that354IN/thatthat
the355DTthe
only356JJonly
damages357NNSdamage
theory358NNtheory
is359VBZbe
based360VVNbase
upon361INupon
that362DTthat
30363CD@card@
percent364NNpercent
commission365NNcommission
.366SENT.
That367DTthat
is368VBZbe
charged369VVNcharge
by370INby
contract371NNcontract
between372INbetween
Apple373NPApple
and374CCand
the375DTthe
developers376NNSdeveloper
.377SENT.
And378CCand
it379PPit
is380VBZbe
deducted381VVNdeduct
from382INfrom
whatever383JJwhatever
price384NNprice
that385IN/thatthat
the386DTthe
developer387NNdeveloper
chooses388VVZchoose
to389TOto
...390:...
to391TOto
set392VVset
,393,,
subject394JJsubject
to395TOto
only396RBonly
the397DTthe
minimal398JJminimal
restriction399NNrestriction
...400:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]401LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
I402PPI
'm403VBPbe
sorry404JJsorry
,405,,
the406DTthe
...407:...
the408DTthe
first409JJfirst
sale410NNsale
is411VBZbe
from412INfrom
Apple413NPApple
to414TOto
the415DTthe
customer416NNcustomer
.417SENT.
It418PPit
's419VBZbe
the420DTthe
customer421NNcustomer
who422WPwho
pays423VVZpay
the424DTthe
30425CD@card@
percent426NNpercent
.427SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]428LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
But429CCbut
there430EXthere
has431VHZhave
always432RBalways
been433VBNbe
a434DTa
...435:...
a436DTa
transaction437NNtransaction
between438INbetween
Apple439NPApple
and440CCand
the441DTthe
developer442NNdeveloper
before443INbefore
that444DTthat
,445,,
which446WDTwhich
has447VHZhave
the448DTthe
pricing449NNpricing
decision450NNdecision
of451INof
what452WPwhat
the453DTthe
developer454NNdeveloper
is455VBZbe
going456VVGgo
to457TOto
do458VVdo
on459INon
account460NNaccount
of461INof
the462DTthe
30463CD@card@
percent464NNpercent
commission465NNcommission
.466SENT.
There467EXthere
is468VBZbe
never469RBnever
...470:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]471LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
Could472MDcould
I473PPI
ask474VVask
you475PPyou
something476NNsomething
...477:...
[MR. D.M. WALL]478LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Sure479NPSure
.480SENT.
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]481LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
...482:...
more483JJRmore
generally484RBgenerally
about485INabout
Illinois486NPIllinois
Brick487NPBrick
?488SENT?
That489DTthat
was490VBDbe
a491DTa
case492NNcase
of493INof
a494DTa
vertical495JJvertical
monopoly496NNmonopoly
:497::
A498DTa
concrete499JJconcrete
block500NNblock
person501NNperson
,502,,
manufacturer503NNmanufacturer
,504,,
monopolizes505VVZmonopolize
the506DTthe
next507JJnext
intermediate508JJintermediate
market509NNmarket
who510WPwho
then511RBthen
sells512VVZsell
to513TOto
a514DTa
customer515NNcustomer
.516SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]517LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Yes518NPYes
.519SENT.
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]520LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
All521DTall
right522NNright
.523SENT.
This524DTthis
is525VBZbe
not526RBnot
quite527RBquite
like528INlike
that529DTthat
.530SENT.
This531DTthis
is532VBZbe
dramatically533RBdramatically
different534JJdifferent
.535SENT.
This536DTthis
is537VBZbe
a538DTa
closed539JJclosed
loop540NNloop
.541SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]542LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
It543PPit
is544VBZbe
a545DTa
closed546JJclosed
loop547NNloop
,548,,
but549CCbut
in550INin
terms551NNSterm
of552INof
the553DTthe
injury554NNinjury
theory555NNtheory
,556,,
which557WDTwhich
is558VBZbe
what559WPwhat
is560VBZbe
at561INat
issue562NNissue
in563INin
...564:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]565LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
They566PPthey
're567VBPbe
not568RBnot
claiming569VVGclaim
the570DTthe
30571CD@card@
percent572NNpercent
is573VBZbe
their574PP$their
injury575NNinjury
.576SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]577LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
No578NPNo
.579SENT.
They're580NPThey're
...581:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]582LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
They're583NPThey're
...584:...
they585PPthey
're586VBPbe
claiming587VVGclaim
their588PP$their
injury589NNinjury
is590VBZbe
the591DTthe
suppression592NNsuppression
of593INof
...594:...
of595INof
a596DTa
cheaper597JJRcheap
price598NNprice
,599,,
does600VVZdo
n't601RBn't
have602VHhave
to603TOto
be604VBbe
percent605NNpercent
.606SENT.
They607PPthey
're608VBPbe
not609RBnot
seeking610VVGseek
30611CD@card@
percent612NNpercent
of613INof
their614PP$their
sales615NNSsale
.616SENT.
They617PPthey
have618VHPhave
to619TOto
go620VVgo
out621RPout
and622CCand
prove623VVprove
at624INat
the625DTthe
next626JJnext
step627NNstep
how628WRBhow
,629,,
without630INwithout
this631DTthis
monopoly632NNmonopoly
,633,,
they634PPthey
would635MDwould
have636VHhave
paid637VVNpay
less638RBRless
.639SENT.
It640PPit
could641MDcould
be642VBbe
as643RBas
little644JJlittle
as645INas
a646DTa
...647:...
a648DTa
penny649NNpenny
or650CCor
nothing651NNnothing
or652CCor
it653PPit
could654MDcould
be655VBbe
something656NNsomething
more657RBRmore
.658SENT.
But659CCbut
the660DTthe
point661NNpoint
is662VBZbe
that663IN/thatthat
this664DTthis
closed665JJclosed
loop666NNloop
with667INwith
Apple668NPApple
as669INas
its670PP$its
spoke671NNspoke
,672,,
they673PPthey
are674VBPbe
the675DTthe
first676JJfirst
purchaser677NNpurchaser
of678INof
that679DTthat
30680CD@card@
percent681NNpercent
markup682NNmarkup
.683SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]684LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
No685NPNo
,686,,
they687PPthey
are688VBPbe
not689RBnot
.690SENT.
The691DTthe
...692:...
the693DTthe
first694JJfirst
purchaser695NNpurchaser
is696VBZbe
clearly697RBclearly
the698DTthe
app699NPApp
developer700NNdeveloper
,701,,
who702WPwho
,703,,
by704INby
contract705NNcontract
,706,,
agrees707VVZagree
that708IN/thatthat
every709DTevery
time710NNtime
it711PPit
puts712VVZput
a713DTa
positive714JJpositive
price715NNprice
on716INon
an717DTan
app718NPApp
,719,,
it720PPit
will721MDwill
allow722VVallow
Apple723NPApple
to724TOto
...725:...
to726TOto
take727VVtake
30728CD@card@
percent729NNpercent
of730INof
it731PPit
.732SENT.
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]733LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
Apple734NPApple
took735VVDtake
percent736NNpercent
from737INfrom
the738DTthe
customer739NNcustomer
...740:...
[MR. D.M. WALL]741LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
And742CCand
the743DTthe
damages744NNSdamage
theory745NNtheory
...746:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]747LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
...748:...
not749RBnot
from750INfrom
the751DTthe
developer752NNdeveloper
.753SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]754LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Apple755NPApple
collects756VVZcollect
the757DTthe
...758:...
the759DTthe
funds760NNSfund
,761,,
but762CCbut
even763RBeven
the764DTthe
Ninth765JJninth
Circuit766NNcircuit
here767RBhere
agreed768VVDagree
that769DTthat
...770:...
that771IN/thatthat
the772DTthe
process773NNprocess
...774:...
the775DTthe
payment776NNpayment
flow777NNflow
is778VBZbe
immaterial779JJimmaterial
to780TOto
the781DTthe
Illinois782NPIllinois
Brick783NPBrick
issue784NNissue
.785SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]786LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
Certainly787RBcertainly
,788,,
I789PPI
would790MDwould
n't791RBn't
think792VVthink
that793WDTthat
's794VBZbe
true795JJtrue
,796,,
even797RBeven
if798INif
they799PPthey
concluded800VVDconclude
it801PPit
.802SENT.
And803CCand
in804INin
a805DTa
simple806JJsimple
theory807NNtheory
,808,,
I809PPI
would810MDwould
have811VHhave
thought812VVNthink
it813PPit
would814MDwould
have815VHhave
been816VBNbe
in817RBin
antitrust818JJantitrust
for819INfor
at820INat
least821JJSleast
100822CD@card@
years823NNSyear
.824SENT.
What825WPWhat
you826PPyou
do827VVPdo
is828VBZbe
you829PPyou
look830VVPlook
to831TOto
see832VVsee
who833WPwho
you834PPyou
claim835VVPclaim
is836VBZbe
the837DTthe
monopolist838NNmonopolist
.839SENT.
Who840WPwho
do841VVPdo
they842PPthey
claim843VVPclaim
is844VBZbe
the845DTthe
monopolist846NNmonopolist
?847SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]848LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Apple849NPApple
.850SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]851LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
Apple852NPApple
.853SENT.
And854CCand
if855INif
you856PPyou
pay857VVPpay
...858:...
if859INif
that860WDTthat
's861VBZbe
true862JJtrue
,863,,
they864PPthey
can865MDcan
raise866VVraise
prices867NNSprice
to868TOto
some869DTsome
people870NNSpeople
,871,,
lower872VVlower
them873PPthem
to874TOto
others875NNSother
,876,,
their877PP$their
suppliers878NNSsupplier
.879SENT.
And880CCand
if881INif
you882PPyou
were883VBDbe
injured884VVNinjure
because885INbecause
you886PPyou
paid887VVDpay
them888PPthem
more889RBRmore
,890,,
the891DTthe
monopolist892NNmonopolist
,893,,
you894PPyou
can895MDcan
collect896VVcollect
damages897NNSdamage
.898SENT.
And899CCand
if900INif
you901PPyou
're902VBPbe
injured903VVNinjure
because904INbecause
they905PPthey
forced906VVDforce
your907PP$your
price908NNprice
down909RBdown
,910,,
you911PPyou
're912VBPbe
a913DTa
supplier914NNsupplier
,915,,
you916PPyou
can917MDcan
collect918VVcollect
damages919NNSdamage
.920SENT.
End921NNend
of922INof
theory923NNtheory
.924SENT.
I925PPI
do926VVPdo
n't927RBn't
see928VVsee
anything929NNanything
in930INin
Illinois931NPIllinois
Brick932NPBrick
that933IN/thatthat
conflicts934NNSconflict
with935INwith
that936DTthat
.937SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]938LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Everything939NNEverything
in940INin
Illinois941NPIllinois
Brick942NPBrick
...943:...
[JUSTICE BREYER]944LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
All945DTall
right946NNright
.947SENT.
What948WPWhat
is949VBZbe
that950RBthat
?951SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]952LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
...953:...
conflicts954NNSconflict
with955INwith
that956DTthat
.957SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]958LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
Yeah959NPYeah
.960SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]961LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
The962NPThe
...963:...
the964DTthe
emphasis965NNemphasis
in966INin
all967DTall
three968CDthree
of969INof
this970DTthis
Court971NPCourt
's972POS's
decision973NNdecision
on974INon
both975DTboth
pass-on976NNpass-on
defenses977NNSdefense
and978CCand
damages979NNSdamage
theories980NNStheory
,981,,
that982WDTthat
's983VBZbe
what984WPwhat
the985DTthe
doctrine986NNdoctrine
disallows987VVZdisallow
.988SENT.
It989PPit
...990:...
it991PPit
says992VVZsay
that993DTthat
...994:...
[JUSTICE BREYER]995LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
Yeah996UHYeah
,997,,
it998PPit
says999VVZsay
that1000IN/thatthat
if1001INif
...1002:...
I1003PPI
do1004VVPdo
n't1005RBn't
mean1006VVmean
to1007TOto
interrupt1008VVinterrupt
you1009PPyou
,1010,,
but1011CCbut
I1012PPI
do1013VVPdo
n't1014RBn't
want1015VVwant
to1016TOto
...1017:...
you1018PPyou
to1019TOto
miss1020VVmiss
the1021DTthe
point1022NNpoint
I1023PPI
'm1024VBPbe
making1025VVGmake
.1026SENT.
If1027INif
Joe1028NPJoe
Smith1029NPSmith
buys1030VVZbuy
from1031INfrom
Bill1032NPBill
,1033,,
who1034WPwho
bought1035VVDbuy
from1036INfrom
the1037DTthe
monopolist1038NNmonopolist
,1039,,
then1040RBthen
we1041PPwe
have1042VHPhave
something1043NNsomething
indirect1044JJindirect
.1045SENT.
But1046CCbut
,1047,,
if1048INif
Joe1049NPJoe
Smith1050NPSmith
bought1051VVDbuy
from1052INfrom
the1053DTthe
monopolist1054NNmonopolist
,1055,,
it1056PPit
is1057VBZbe
direct1058JJdirect
.1059SENT.
That1060DTthat
's1061VBZbe
a1062DTa
simple1063JJsimple
theory1064NNtheory
.1065SENT.
Now1066RBnow
I1067PPI
can1068MDcan
't1069RB't
find1070VVfind
in1071INin
reason1072NNreason
or1073CCor
in1074INin
case1075NNcase
law1076NNlaw
or1077CCor
in1078INin
anything1079NNanything
I1080PPI
've1081VHPhave
ever1082RBever
learned1083VVNlearn
in1084INin
antitrust1085JJantitrust
anything1086NNanything
that1087WDTthat
would1088MDwould
conflict1089VVconflict
with1090INwith
that1091DTthat
.1092SENT.
And1093CCand
what1094WPwhat
I1095PPI
want1096VVPwant
you1097PPyou
is1098VBZbe
to1099TOto
tell1100VVtell
me1101PPme
what1102WPwhat
?1103SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]1104LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
What1105WPWhat
conflicts1106VVZconflict
with1107INwith
that1108DTthat
in1109INin
this1110DTthis
case1111NNcase
is1112VBZbe
that1113IN/thatthat
the1114DTthe
alleged1115JJalleged
monopolization1116NNmonopolization
,1117,,
which1118WDTwhich
is1119VBZbe
over1120INover
the1121DTthe
distribution1122NNdistribution
function1123NNfunction
,1124,,
allegedly1125RBallegedly
first1126JJfirst
manifests1127NNSmanifest
in1128INin
a1129DTa
301130CD@card@
percent1131NNpercent
commission1132NNcommission
.1133SENT.
Consumers1134NNSconsumer
do1135VVPdo
not1136RBnot
pay1137VVpay
the1138DTthe
percent1139NNpercent
commission1140NNcommission
.1141SENT.
There1142EXthere
was1143VBDbe
an1144DTan
effort1145NNeffort
in1146INin
the1147DTthe
...1148:...
in1149INin
the1150DTthe
district1151NNdistrict
court1152NNcourt
to1153TOto
try1154VVtry
to1155TOto
argue1156VVargue
that1157DTthat
...1158:...
that1159IN/thatthat
Apple1160NPApple
added1161VVDadd
that1162IN/thatthat
,1163,,
but1164CCbut
that1165WDTthat
was1166VBDbe
abandoned1167VVNabandon
.1168SENT.
So1169RBso
what1170WPwhat
we1171PPwe
have1172VHPhave
here1173RBhere
instead1174RBinstead
is1175VBZbe
a1176DTa
damage1177NNdamage
theory1178NNtheory
that1179WDTthat
runs1180VVZrun
through1181INthrough
the1182DTthe
independent1183JJindependent
pricing1184NNpricing
decisions1185NNSdecision
of1186INof
the1187DTthe
app1188NPApp
developers1189NNSdeveloper
.1190SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]1191LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
Does1192VVZdo
your1193PP$your
answer1194NNanswer
to1195TOto
Justice1196NPJustice
Breyer1197NPBreyer
depend1198VVPdepend
on1199INon
what1200WPwhat
you1201PPyou
said1202VVDsay
,1203,,
that1204IN/thatthat
the1205DTthe
alleged1206JJalleged
monopolization1207NNmonopolization
is1208VBZbe
in1209INin
the1210DTthe
distribution1211NNdistribution
function1212NNfunction
?1213SENT?
Because1214INbecause
I1215PPI
understood1216VVDunderstand
the1217DTthe
...1218:...
the1219DTthe
Respondents1220NNSrespondent
now1221RBnow
to1222TOto
be1223VBbe
saying1224VVGsay
,1225,,
no1226UHno
,1227,,
that1228WDTthat
's1229VBZbe
wrong1230JJwrong
;1231:;
the1232DTthe
alleged1233JJalleged
monopolization1234NNmonopolization
is1235VBZbe
in1236INin
the1237DTthe
apps1238NNSapps
themselves1239PPthemselves
.1240SENT.
In1241INin
other1242JJother
words1243NNSword
,1244,,
the1245DTthe
consumer1246NNconsumer
says1247VVZsay
you1248PPyou
have1249VHhave
a1250DTa
monopoly1251NNmonopoly
on1252INon
apps1253NNSapps
.1254SENT.
You1255PPyou
might1256MDmight
also1257RBalso
have1258VHhave
a1259DTa
monopoly1260NNmonopoly
on1261INon
the1262DTthe
distribution1263NNdistribution
function1264NNfunction
,1265,,
which1266WDTwhich
the1267DTthe
app1268NPApp
developers1269NNSdeveloper
have1270VHPhave
to1271TOto
live1272VVlive
with1273INwith
,1274,,
but1275CCbut
you1276PPyou
have1277VHPhave
a1278DTa
monopoly1279NNmonopoly
on1280INon
apps1281NNSapps
,1282,,
which1283WDTwhich
the1284DTthe
consumers1285NNSconsumer
have1286VHPhave
to1287TOto
live1288VVlive
with1289INwith
.1290SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]1291LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
In1292INin
...1293:...
[JUSTICE KAGAN]1294LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
So1295RBso
,1296,,
in1297INin
responding1298VVGrespond
to1299TOto
Justice1300NPJustice
Breyer1301NPBreyer
,1302,,
you1303PPyou
said1304VVDsay
:1305::
Well1306UHwell
,1307,,
it1308PPit
's1309VBZbe
because1310INbecause
the1311DTthe
alleged1312JJalleged
monopoly1313NNmonopoly
is1314VBZbe
the1315DTthe
distribution1316NNdistribution
function1317NNfunction
.1318SENT.
But1319CCbut
I1320PPI
do1321VVPdo
n't1322RBn't
think1323VVthink
that1324IN/thatthat
that1325DTthat
's1326VBZbe
correct1327JJcorrect
.1328SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]1329LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Well1330UHWell
,1331,,
two1332CDtwo
points1333NNSpoint
,1334,,
Justice1335NPJustice
Kagan1336NPKagan
.1337SENT.
First1338JJfirst
of1339INof
all1340DTall
,1341,,
it1342PPit
is1343VBZbe
correct1344JJcorrect
.1345SENT.
The1346DTthe
...1347:...
the1348DTthe
complaint1349NNcomplaint
repeatedly1350RBrepeatedly
alleges1351VVZallege
at1352INat
paragraphs1353NNSparagraph
31354CD3
,1355,,
81356CD8
,1357,,
and1358CCand
531359CD@card@
that1360WDTthat
this1361DTthis
is1362VBZbe
a1363DTa
case1364NNcase
about1365RBabout
...1366:...
about1367INabout
a1368DTa
distribution1369NNdistribution
market1370NNmarket
.1371SENT.
It1372PPit
has1373VHZhave
always1374RBalways
been1375VBNbe
a1376DTa
case1377NNcase
about1378INabout
a1379DTa
distribution1380NNdistribution
market1381NNmarket
.1382SENT.
And1383CCand
it1384PPit
necessarily1385RBnecessarily
is1386VBZbe
because1387INbecause
there1388EXthere
is1389VBZbe
no1390DTno
good-faith1391NNgood-faith
allegation1392NNallegation
that1393WDTthat
...1394:...
that1395IN/thatthat
Apple1396NPApple
actually1397RBactually
monopolizes1398VVZmonopolize
the1399DTthe
apps1400NNSapps
as1401INas
software1402NNsoftware
.1403SENT.
It1404PPit
is1405VBZbe
...1406:...
it1407PPit
is1408VBZbe
simply1409RBsimply
the1410DTthe
pipeline1411NNpipeline
,1412,,
the1413DTthe
sale1414NNsale
of1415INof
the1416DTthe
apps1417NNSapps
,1418,,
which1419WDTwhich
is1420VBZbe
...1421:...
which1422WDTwhich
is1423VBZbe
alternatively1424RBalternatively
described1425VVNdescribe
in1426INin
this1427DTthis
case1428NNcase
as1429INas
either1430DTeither
distribution1431NNdistribution
or1432CCor
as1433INas
the1434DTthe
so-called1435JJso-called
aftermarket1436NNaftermarket
,1437,,
which1438WDTwhich
is1439VBZbe
simply1440RBsimply
limiting1441VVGlimit
that1442IN/thatthat
to1443TOto
iOS1444NNSiOS
apps1445NNSapps
instead1446RBinstead
of1447INof
the1448DTthe
801449CD@card@
percent1450NNpercent
of1451INof
the1452DTthe
apps1453NNSapps
...1454:...
[JUSTICE BREYER]1455LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
You1456PPyou
know1457VVPknow
,1458,,
there1459EXthere
are1460VBPbe
an1461DTan
awful1462JJawful
lot1463NNlot
of1464INof
words1465NNSword
in1466INin
this1467DTthis
case1468NNcase
that1469IN/thatthat
I1470PPI
tend1471VVPtend
to1472TOto
have1473VHhave
trouble1474NNtrouble
understanding1475NNunderstanding
.1476SENT.
One1477PPone
is1478VBZbe
two-sided1479JJtwo-sided
market1480NNmarket
.1481SENT.
Another1482DTanother
is1483VBZbe
a1484DTa
lot1485NNlot
that1486IN/thatthat
you1487PPyou
used1488VVDuse
.1489SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]1490LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Uh-huh1491NPUh-huh
.1492SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]1493LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
So1494INso
I1495PPI
go1496VVPgo
by1497INby
simple1498JJsimple
analogy1499NNanalogy
.1500SENT.
If1501INif
Bill1502NPBill
buys1503VVZbuy
from1504INfrom
the1505DTthe
monopolist1506NNmonopolist
,1507,,
he1508PPhe
is1509VBZbe
a1510DTa
direct1511JJdirect
purchaser1512NNpurchaser
.1513SENT.
If1514INif
Bill1515NPBill
buys1516VVZbuy
from1517INfrom
Sam1518NPSam
,1519,,
who1520WPwho
buys1521VVZbuy
from1522INfrom
the1523DTthe
monopolist1524NNmonopolist
,1525,,
he1526PPhe
is1527VBZbe
an1528DTan
indirect1529JJindirect
purchaser1530NNpurchaser
.1531SENT.
Anyone1532NNAnyone
can1533MDcan
understand1534VVunderstand
that1535DTthat
.1536SENT.
And1537CCand
when1538WRBwhen
I1539PPI
get1540VVPget
into1541INinto
what1542WPwhat
I1543PPI
think1544VVPthink
of1545INof
as1546INas
jargon1547NNjargon
,1548,,
I1549PPI
begin1550VVPbegin
to1551TOto
think1552VVthink
:1553::
Suppose1554VVPsuppose
I1555PPI
were1556VBDbe
advising1557VVGadvise
United1558NPUnited
Fruit1559NPFruit
Company1560NPCompany
.1561SENT.
I1562PPI
have1563VHPhave
a1564DTa
great1565JJgreat
idea1566NNidea
.1567SENT.
You1568PPyou
won1569MDwill
't1570RB't
have1571VHPhave
to1572TOto
torpedo1573VVtorpedo
the1574DTthe
boats1575NNSboat
of1576INof
your1577PP$your
competitors1578NNScompetitor
anymore1579RBanymore
.1580SENT.
Here1581RBhere
's1582VBZbe
what1583WPwhat
you1584PPyou
do1585VVPdo
:1586::
What1587WPWhat
you1588PPyou
do1589VVPdo
is1590VBZbe
you1591PPyou
buy1592VVPbuy
from1593INfrom
the1594DTthe
farmers1595NNSfarmer
and1596CCand
you1597PPyou
tell1598VVPtell
the1599DTthe
farmers1600NNSfarmer
what1601WPwhat
you1602PPyou
will1603MDwill
pay1604VVpay
the1605DTthe
banana1606NNbanana
farmers1607NNSfarmer
is1608VBZbe
a1609DTa
very1610RBvery
low1611JJlow
price1612NNprice
plus1613CCplus
301614CD@card@
percent1615NNpercent
commission1616NNcommission
.1617SENT.
And1618CCand
then1619RBthen
what1620WPwhat
you1621PPyou
do1622VVPdo
is1623VBZbe
,1624,,
when1625WRBwhen
you1626PPyou
sell1627VVPsell
to1628TOto
banana1629NNbanana
consumers1630NNSconsumer
throughout1631INthroughout
the1632DTthe
world1633NNworld
,1634,,
you1635PPyou
charge1636VVPcharge
them1637PPthem
that1638IN/thatthat
301639CD@card@
percent1640NNpercent
commission1641NNcommission
,1642,,
which1643WDTwhich
they1644PPthey
say1645VVPsay
is1646VBZbe
a1647DTa
higher1648JJRhigh
price1649NNprice
.1650SENT.
And1651CCand
if1652INif
you1653PPyou
,1654,,
United1655NPUnited
Fruit1656NPFruit
,1657,,
did1658VVDdo
not1659RBnot
become1660VVbecome
a1661DTa
monopolist1662NNmonopolist
.1663SENT.
Now1664RBnow
I1665PPI
think1666VVPthink
I1667PPI
'm1668VBPbe
advising1669VVGadvise
Jay1670NPJay
Rockefeller1671NPRockefeller
,1672,,
John1673NPJohn
Rockefeller1674NPRockefeller
,1675,,
and1676CCand
I1677PPI
give1678VVPgive
him1679PPhim
the1680DTthe
same1681JJsame
advice1682NNadvice
.1683SENT.
And1684CCand
I1685PPI
give1686VVPgive
the1687DTthe
same1688JJsame
advice1689NNadvice
to1690TOto
United1691NPUnited
Shoe1692NPShoe
,1693,,
which1694WDTwhich
happened1695VVDhappen
to1696TOto
be1697VBbe
a1698DTa
distribution1699NNdistribution
company1700NNcompany
.1701SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]1702LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
But1703CCbut
...1704:...
[JUSTICE BREYER]1705LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
And1706CCand
we1707PPwe
thereby1708RBthereby
have1709VHPhave
...1710:...
well1711UHwell
,1712,,
you1713PPyou
see1714VVPsee
the1715DTthe
point1716NNpoint
.1717SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]1718LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
But1719CCbut
the1720DTthe
difference1721NNdifference
here1722RBhere
is1723VBZbe
...1724:...
is1725VBZbe
that1726IN/thatthat
there1727RBthere
...1728:...
there1729EXthere
is1730VBZbe
...1731:...
there1732EXthere
is1733VBZbe
no1734DTno
third-party1735JJthird-party
intermediary1736NNintermediary
that1737WDTthat
is1738VBZbe
setting1739VVGset
the1740DTthe
price1741NNprice
and1742CCand
exercising1743VVGexercise
its1744PP$its
independent1745JJindependent
determination1746NNdetermination
as1747INas
to1748TOto
whether1749INwhether
any1750DTany
or1751CCor
all1752DTall
of1753INof
the1754DTthe
initial1755JJinitial
over-charge1756NNover-charge
,1757,,
which1758WDTwhich
is1759VBZbe
some1760DTsome
part1761NNpart
or1762CCor
all1763DTall
of1764INof
the1765DTthe
commission1766NNcommission
,1767,,
is1768VBZbe
going1769VVGgo
to1770TOto
manifest1771VVmanifest
itself1772PPitself
in1773INin
the1774DTthe
app1775NPApp
's1776POS's
price1777NNprice
.1778SENT.
And1779CCand
that1780DTthat
's1781VBZbe
why1782WRBwhy
I1783PPI
started1784VVDstart
with1785INwith
...1786:...
with1787INwith
...1788:...
with1789INwith
...1790:...
the1791DTthe
simple1792NNsimple
I1793PPI
would1794MDwould
...1795:...
would1796MDwould
...1797:...
would1798MDwould
say1799VVsay
...1800:...
you1801PPyou
know1802VVPknow
,1803,,
the1804DTthe
hypothetical1805JJhypothetical
of1806INof
imagine1807VVimagine
the1808DTthe
price1809NNprice
today1810NNtoday
is1811VBZbe
the1812DTthe
competitive1813JJcompetitive
price1814NNprice
,1815,,
the1816DTthe
301817CD@card@
percent1818NNpercent
is1819VBZbe
the1820DTthe
competitive1821JJcompetitive
price1822NNprice
,1823,,
and1824CCand
it1825PPit
goes1826VVZgo
up1827RPup
by1828INby
101829CD@card@
points1830NNSpoint
tomorrow1831NNtomorrow
.1832SENT.
No1833DTno
consumer1834NNconsumer
is1835VBZbe
injured1836VVNinjure
unless1837INunless
the1838DTthe
apps1839NNSapps
'1840POS'
prices1841NNSprice
change1842NNchange
.1843SENT.
The1844DTthe
apps1845NNSapps
'1846POS'
prices1847NNSprice
have1848VHPhave
to1849TOto
change1850VVchange
.1851SENT.
And1852CCand
if1853INif
they1854PPthey
do1855VVPdo
n't1856RBn't
...1857:...
and1858CCand
they1859PPthey
only1860RBonly
change1861VVPchange
by1862INby
virtue1863NNvirtue
of1864INof
a1865DTa
decision1866NNdecision
which1867WDTwhich
implicates1868VVZimplicate
everything1869NNeverything
this1870DTthis
Court1871NPCourt
talked1872VVDtalk
about1873RBabout
in1874INin
Hanover1875NPHanover
Shoe1876NPShoe
,1877,,
in1878INin
Illinois1879NPIllinois
Brick1880NPBrick
,1881,,
and1882CCand
in1883INin
UtiliCorp1884NPUtiliCorp
.1885SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]1886LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
Well1887UHWell
,1888,,
Mr1889NPMr
.1890SENT.
Wall1891NPWall
,1892,,
I1893PPI
think1894VVPthink
you1895PPyou
're1896VBPbe
avoiding1897VVGavoid
the1898DTthe
question1899NNquestion
a1900DTa
bit1901NNbit
because1902INbecause
,1903,,
I1904PPI
mean1905VVPmean
,1906,,
the1907DTthe
questions1908NNSquestion
that1909WDTthat
are1910VBPbe
being1911VBGbe
put1912VVNput
to1913TOto
you1914PPyou
by1915INby
my1916PP$my
colleagues1917NNScolleague
are1918VBPbe
really1919RBreally
,1920,,
what1921WPwhat
was1922VBDbe
Illinois1923NPIllinois
Brick1924NPBrick
about1925RBabout
?1926SENT?
Was1927VBDbe
it1928PPit
about1929INabout
a1930DTa
vertical1931JJvertical
supply1932NNsupply
chain1933NNchain
or1934CCor
,1935,,
instead1936RBinstead
,1937,,
was1938VBDbe
it1939PPit
about1940INabout
a1941DTa
pass-through1942JJpass-through
theory1943NNtheory
?1944SENT?
Now1945RBnow
,1946,,
in1947INin
the1948DTthe
facts1949NNSfact
of1950INof
Illinois1951NPIllinois
Brick1952NPBrick
and1953CCand
,1954,,
indeed1955RBindeed
,1956,,
in1957INin
the1958DTthe
facts1959NNSfact
of1960INof
all1961PDTall
the1962DTthe
Illinois1963NPIllinois
Brick1964NPBrick
cases1965NNScase
that1966IN/thatthat
we1967PPwe
've1968VHPhave
discussed1969VVNdiscuss
,1970,,
you1971PPyou
had1972VHDhave
both1973DTboth
.1974SENT.
So1975RBso
you1976PPyou
did1977VVDdo
n't1978RBn't
have1979VHhave
to1980TOto
separate1981VVseparate
the1982DTthe
two1983CDtwo
.1984SENT.
And1985CCand
now1986RBnow
,1987,,
here1988RBhere
,1989,,
you1990PPyou
do1991VVPdo
n't1992RBn't
have1993VHhave
both1994DTboth
,1995,,
because1996INbecause
this1997DTthis
is1998VBZbe
not1999RBnot
a2000DTa
vertical2001JJvertical
supply2002NNsupply
chain2003NNchain
,2004,,
but2005CCbut
there2006EXthere
still2007RBstill
is2008VBZbe
a2009DTa
pass-through2010JJpass-through
mechanism2011NNmechanism
.2012SENT.
So2013RBso
then2014RBthen
the2015DTthe
question2016NNquestion
is2017VBZbe
,2018,,
does2019VVZdo
Illinois2020NPIllinois
Brick2021NPBrick
apply2022VVapply
to2023TOto
that2024DTthat
or2025CCor
not2026RBnot
?2027SENT?
And2028CCand
I2029PPI
think2030VVPthink
what2031WPwhat
Justice2032NPJustice
Breyer2033NPBreyer
was2034VBDbe
suggesting2035VVGsuggest
to2036TOto
you2037PPyou
,2038,,
that2039IN/thatthat
as2040RBas
long2041RBlong
as2042INas
it2043PPit
's2044VBZbe
not2045RBnot
that2046DTthat
vertical2047JJvertical
supply2048NNsupply
chain2049NNchain
where2050WRBwhere
the2051DTthe
person2052NNperson
is2053VBZbe
not2054RBnot
buying2055VVGbuy
from2056INfrom
the2057DTthe
monopolist2058NNmonopolist
itself2059PPitself
,2060,,
here2061RBhere
,2062,,
the2063DTthe
person2064NNperson
is2065VBZbe
transacting2066VVGtransact
with2067INwith
the2068DTthe
monopolist2069NNmonopolist
itself2070PPitself
,2071,,
that2072IN/thatthat
that2073DTthat
's2074VBZbe
what2075WPwhat
separates2076VVZseparate
this2077DTthis
case2078NNcase
from2079INfrom
Illinois2080NPIllinois
Brick2081NPBrick
and2082CCand
makes2083VVZmake
it2084PPit
entirely2085RBentirely
different2086JJdifferent
,2087,,
notwithstanding2088INnotwithstanding
that2089WDTthat
there2090EXthere
's2091VBZbe
some2092DTsome
kind2093NNkind
of2094INof
pass-through2095JJpass-through
mechanism2096NNmechanism
involved2097VVNinvolve
.2098SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]2099LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
I2100PPI
completely2101RBcompletely
agree2102VVPagree
with2103INwith
you2104PPyou
that2105IN/thatthat
the2106DTthe
key2107NNkey
to2108TOto
this2109DTthis
is2110VBZbe
deciding2111VVGdecide
what2112WPwhat
Illinois2113NPIllinois
Brick2114NPBrick
was2115VBDbe
about2116RBabout
.2117SENT.
Was2118VBDbe
it2119PPit
simply2120RBsimply
a2121DTa
formalistic2122JJformalistic
case2123NNcase
about2124INabout
vertical2125JJvertical
chains2126NNSchain
,2127,,
or2128CCor
was2129VBDbe
it2130PPit
about2131RBabout
pass-through2132JJpass-through
?2133SENT?
And2134CCand
in2135INin
answering2136VVGanswer
that2137DTthat
question2138NNquestion
,2139,,
I2140PPI
would2141MDwould
begin2142VVbegin
with2143INwith
,2144,,
first2145JJfirst
of2146INof
all2147DTall
,2148,,
with2149INwith
Hanover2150NPHanover
Shoe2151NPShoe
,2152,,
which2153WDTwhich
is2154VBZbe
about2155RBabout
a2156DTa
pass-on2157NNpass-on
defense2158NNdefense
and2159CCand
about2160RBabout
the2161DTthe
...2162:...
the2163DTthe
difficulties2164NNSdifficulty
in2165INin
...2166:...
in2167INin
the2168DTthe
...2169:...
the2170DTthe
...2171:...
the2172DTthe
potential2173JJpotential
complication2174NNcomplication
of2175INof
antitrust2176JJantitrust
litigation2177NNlitigation
through2178INthrough
pass-on2179NNpass-on
defense2180NNdefense
,2181,,
and2182CCand
then2183RBthen
the2184DTthe
framing2185NNframing
of2186INof
the2187DTthe
question2188NNquestion
in2189INin
Illinois2190NPIllinois
Brick2191NPBrick
by2192INby
this2193DTthis
Court2194NPCourt
which2195WDTwhich
said2196VVDsay
,2197,,
having2198VHGhave
already2199RBalready
found2200VVNfind
that2201IN/thatthat
we2202PPwe
will2203MDwill
not2204RBnot
allow2205VVallow
a2206DTa
pass-on2207NNpass-on
defense2208NNdefense
,2209,,
we2210PPwe
are2211VBPbe
now2212RBnow
confronted2213VVNconfront
with2214INwith
the2215DTthe
question2216NNquestion
to2217TOto
whether2218CCwhether
allow2219VVallow
pass-on2220NNpass-on
to2221TOto
be2222VBbe
used2223VVNuse
offensively2224RBoffensively
.2225SENT.
It2226PPit
was2227VBDbe
1002228CD@card@
percent2229NNpercent
about2230INabout
pass-on2231NNpass-on
.2232SENT.
The2233DTthe
vertical2234JJvertical
chain2235NNchain
was2236VBDbe
the2237DTthe
factual2238JJfactual
setting2239NNsetting
of2240INof
the2241DTthe
case2242NNcase
,2243,,
and2244CCand
,2245,,
indeed2246RBindeed
,2247,,
Respondents2248NNSrespondent
'2249POS'
argument2250NNargument
would2251MDwould
...2252:...
would2253MDwould
have2254VHhave
this2255DTthis
Court2256NPCourt
believe2257VVPbelieve
that2258IN/thatthat
the2259DTthe
factual2260JJfactual
setting2261NNsetting
is2262VBZbe
the2263DTthe
sum2264NNsum
and2265CCand
substance2266NNsubstance
of2267INof
the2268DTthe
Court2269NPCourt
's2270POS's
reasoning2271NNreasoning
.2272SENT.
[JUSTICE ALITO]2273LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
Mr2274NPMr
.2275SENT.
Wall2276NPWall
,2277,,
could2278MDcould
I2279PPI
ask2280VVask
you2281PPyou
about2282INabout
what2283WPwhat
troubles2284VVZtrouble
me2285PPme
about2286INabout
your2287PP$your
position2288NNposition
,2289,,
and2290CCand
...2291:...
and2292CCand
it2293PPit
is2294VBZbe
this2295DTthis
:2296::
Illinois2297NPIllinois
Brick2298NPBrick
was2299VBDbe
not2300RBnot
about2301RBabout
economic2302JJeconomic
theory2303NNtheory
.2304SENT.
It2305PPit
was2306VBDbe
about2307RBabout
the2308DTthe
court's2309NNScourt's
...2310:...
the2311DTthe
court's2312NNScourt's
...2313:...
the2314DTthe
basis2315NNbasis
for2316INfor
the2317DTthe
decision2318NNdecision
was2319VBDbe
not2320RBnot
economic2321JJeconomic
theory2322NNtheory
,2323,,
as2324INas
I2325PPI
read2326VVPread
the2327DTthe
case2328NNcase
.2329SENT.
It2330PPit
's2331VBZbe
the2332DTthe
court2333NNcourt
's2334POS's
calculation2335NNcalculation
of2336INof
what2337WPwhat
makes2338VVZmake
for2339INfor
an2340DTan
effective2341JJeffective
and2342CCand
efficient2343JJefficient
litigation2344NNlitigation
scheme2345NNscheme
.2346SENT.
And2347CCand
maybe2348RBmaybe
your2349PP$your
answer2350NNanswer
to2351TOto
this2352DTthis
question2353NNquestion
is2354VBZbe
that2355IN/thatthat
the2356DTthe
validity2357NNvalidity
of2358INof
Illinois2359NPIllinois
Brick2360NPBrick
is2361VBZbe
not2362RBnot
before2363INbefore
us2364PPus
.2365SENT.
But2366CCbut
I2367PPI
really2368RBreally
wonder2369VVPwonder
whether2370INwhether
,2371,,
in2372INin
light2373NNlight
of2374INof
what2375WPwhat
has2376VHZhave
happened2377VVNhappen
since2378INsince
then2379RBthen
,2380,,
the2381DTthe
court2382NNcourt
's2383POS's
evaluation2384NNevaluation
stands2385VVZstand
up2386RPup
.2387SENT.
Take2388VVtake
the2389DTthe
third2390JJthird
point2391NNpoint
that2392IN/thatthat
it2393PPit
makes2394VVZmake
about2395RBabout
that2396IN/thatthat
the2397DTthe
direct2398JJdirect
...2399:...
the2400DTthe
so-called2401JJso-called
direct2402JJdirect
purchasers2403NNSpurchaser
are2404VBPbe
the2405DTthe
most2406RBSmost
efficient2407JJefficient
and2408CCand
most2409RBSmost
...2410:...
in2411INin
the2412DTthe
best2413JJSgood
position2414NNposition
to2415TOto
...2416:...
to2417TOto
sue2418VVsue
.2419SENT.
If2420INif
we2421PPwe
look2422VVPlook
at2423INat
this2424DTthis
case2425NNcase
,2426,,
how2427WRBhow
many2428JJmany
app2429NPApp
developers2430NNSdeveloper
are2431VBPbe
there2432RBthere
whose2433WP$whose
apps2434NNSapps
are2435VBPbe
sold2436VVNsell
at2437INat
the2438DTthe
Apple2439NPApple
store2440NNstore
?2441SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]2442LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Tens2443NNSten
of2444INof
thousands2445NNSthousand
.2446SENT.
[JUSTICE ALITO]2447LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
Yeah2448NPYeah
.2449SENT.
Has2450VHZhave
any2451DTany
one2452CDone
of2453INof
them2454PPthem
ever2455RBever
sued2456VVDsue
?2457SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]2458LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
None2459NNnone
have2460VHPhave
ever2461RBever
sued2462VVNsue
.2463SENT.
There2464EXthere
have2465VHPhave
been2466VBNbe
...2467:...
there2468EXthere
have2469VHPhave
been2470VBNbe
plenty2471NNplenty
of2472INof
disputes2473NNSdispute
,2474,,
but2475CCbut
none2476NNnone
has2477VHZhave
ever2478RBever
gone2479VVNgo
to2480TOto
litigation2481NNlitigation
.2482SENT.
For2483INfor
that2484DTthat
matter2485NNmatter
,2486,,
no2487DTno
state2488NNstate
or2489CCor
federal2490JJfederal
antitrust2491JJantitrust
agency2492NNagency
has2493VHZhave
ever2494RBever
sued2495VVNsue
either2496RBeither
.2497SENT.
We2498PPwe
do2499VVPdo
not2500RBnot
take2501VVtake
that2502DTthat
...2503:...
we2504PPwe
do2505VVPdo
not2506RBnot
take2507VVtake
the2508DTthe
...2509:...
the2510DTthe
absence2511NNabsence
of2512INof
litigation2513NNlitigation
as2514INas
evidence2515NNevidence
of2516INof
an2517DTan
oppressed2518VVNoppress
developer2519NNdeveloper
community2520NNcommunity
that2521WDTthat
cannot2522MDcan
speak2523VVspeak
for2524INfor
itself2525PPitself
.2526SENT.
These2527DTthese
...2528:...
you2529PPyou
know2530VVPknow
,2531,,
the2532DTthe
fact2533NNfact
of2534INof
the2535DTthe
matter2536NNmatter
is2537VBZbe
that2538IN/thatthat
nowadays2539RBnowadays
major2540JJmajor
companies2541NNScompany
suing2542VVGsue
their2543PP$their
suppliers2544NNSsupplier
happens2545VVZhappen
all2546DTall
of2547INof
the2548DTthe
time2549NNtime
.2550SENT.
The2551DTthe
idea2552NNidea
that2553IN/thatthat
it2554PPit
...2555:...
that2556WDTthat
it2557PPit
...2558:...
that2559IN/thatthat
it2560PPit
does2561VVZdo
n't2562RBn't
,2563,,
which2564WDTwhich
was2565VBDbe
decried2566VVNdecry
by2567INby
Judge2568NPJudge
Posner2569NPPosner
as2570INas
fanciful2571JJfanciful
,2572,,
has2573VHZhave
proven2574VVNprove
to2575TOto
be2576VBbe
fanciful2577JJfanciful
because2578INbecause
it2579PPit
literally2580RBliterally
happens2581VVZhappen
all2582DTall
of2583INof
the2584DTthe
time2585NNtime
.2586SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]2587LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Well2588UHWell
,2589,,
Mr2590NPMr
.2591SENT.
Wall2592NPWall
,2593,,
along2594INalong
those2595DTthose
lines2596NNSline
,2597,,
I2598PPI
...2599:...
I2600PPI
take2601VVPtake
your2602PP$your
point2603NNpoint
that2604IN/thatthat
Illinois2605NPIllinois
Brick2606NPBrick
and2607CCand
Hanover2608NPHanover
Shoe2609NPShoe
might2610MDmight
be2611VBbe
read2612VVNread
about2613INabout
the2614DTthe
economic2615JJeconomic
realities2616NNSreality
of2617INof
the2618DTthe
pass-through2619JJpass-through
mechanism2620NNmechanism
being2621VBGbe
important2622JJimportant
,2623,,
rather2624RBrather
than2625INthan
the2626DTthe
contractual2627JJcontractual
formalities2628NNSformality
,2629,,
whether2630INwhether
it2631PPit
's2632VBZbe
a2633DTa
sales2634JJsales
agent2635NNagent
or2636CCor
a2637DTa
formal2638JJformal
purchase2639NNpurchase
between2640INbetween
the2641DTthe
manufacturer2642NNmanufacturer
and2643CCand
the2644DTthe
distributor2645NNdistributor
.2646SENT.
And2647CCand
antitrust2648JJantitrust
normally2649RBnormally
accounts2650VVZaccount
for2651INfor
economics2652NNSeconomics
,2653,,
rather2654RBrather
than2655INthan
forms2656NNSform
of2657INof
contract2658NNcontract
.2659SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]2660LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Indeed2661RBindeed
.2662SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]2663LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
I2664PPI
take2665VVPtake
your2666PP$your
point2667NNpoint
.2668SENT.
But2669CCbut
building2670VVGbuild
on2671INon
what2672WPwhat
Justice2673NPJustice
Alito2674NPAlito
had2675VHDhave
in2676INin
mind2677NNmind
,2678,,
Illinois2679NPIllinois
Brick2680NPBrick
has2681VHZhave
been2682VBNbe
questioned2683VVNquestion
by2684INby
states2685NNSstate
before2686INbefore
this2687DTthis
Court2688NPCourt
in2689INin
an2690DTan
amicus2691NNamicus
brief2692NNbrief
.2693SENT.
You2694PPyou
're2695VBPbe
asking2696VVGask
us2697PPus
to2698TOto
extend2699VVextend
Illinois2700NPIllinois
Brick2701NPBrick
,2702,,
admittedly2703RBadmittedly
,2704,,
only2705RBonly
because2706INbecause
of2707INof
a2708DTa
contractual2709JJcontractual
formality2710NNformality
and2711CCand
the2712DTthe
economic2713JJeconomic
realities2714NNSreality
are2715VBPbe
the2716DTthe
same2717JJsame
.2718SENT.
I2719PPI
'll2720MDwill
spot2721VVspot
you2722PPyou
all2723RBall
of2724INof
that2725IN/thatthat
for2726INfor
purposes2727NNSpurpose
of2728INof
this2729DTthis
question2730NNquestion
.2731SENT.
But2732CCbut
why2733WRBwhy
should2734MDshould
we2735PPwe
build2736VVbuild
on2737INon
Illinois2738NPIllinois
Brick2739NPBrick
?2740SENT?
Should2741MDshould
n't2742RBn't
we2743PPwe
question2744VVPquestion
Illinois2745NPIllinois
Brick2746NPBrick
,2747,,
perhaps2748RBperhaps
,2749,,
given2750VVNgive
the2751DTthe
fact2752NNfact
that2753IN/thatthat
so2754RBso
many2755JJmany
states2756NNSstate
have2757VHPhave
done2758VVNdo
so2759RBso
.2760SENT.
They2761PPthey
've2762VHPhave
repealed2763VVNrepeal
it2764PPit
.2765SENT.
There2766EXthere
have2767VHPhave
n't2768RBn't
been2769VBNbe
a2770DTa
huge2771JJhuge
number2772NNnumber
of2773INof
reported2774VVNreport
problems2775NNSproblem
with2776INwith
indirect2777JJindirect
purchasers2778NNSpurchaser
and2779CCand
direct2780JJdirect
purchasers2781NNSpurchaser
receiving2782VVGreceive
double2783JJdouble
recovery2784NNrecovery
,2785,,
one2786CDone
of2787INof
the2788DTthe
problems2789NNSproblem
Illinois2790NPIllinois
Brick2791NPBrick
built2792VVDbuild
on2793INon
,2794,,
and2795CCand
the2796DTthe
other2797JJother
one2798CDone
,2799,,
which2800WDTwhich
Justice2801NPJustice
Alito2802NPAlito
alluded2803VVDallude
to2804TOto
,2805,,
is2806VBZbe
direct2807JJdirect
purchasers2808NNSpurchaser
do2809VVPdo
n't2810RBn't
always2811RBalways
sue2812VVsue
because2813INbecause
there2814EXthere
's2815VBZbe
a2816DTa
threat2817NNthreat
that2818IN/thatthat
monopolists2819NNSmonopolist
will2820MDwill
share2821VVshare
the2822DTthe
rents2823NNSrent
with2824INwith
the2825DTthe
direct2826JJdirect
purchasers2827NNSpurchaser
.2828SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]2829LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Right2830NPRight
.2831SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]2832LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
And2833CCand
indirect2834JJindirect
purchasers2835NNSpurchaser
may2836MDmay
be2837VBbe
better2838RBRwell
suited2839VVNsuit
to2840TOto
enforce2841VVenforce
the2842DTthe
antitrust2843JJantitrust
laws2844NNSlaw
.2845SENT.
So2846INso
long2847JJlong
wind-up2848NNSwind-up
.2849SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]2850LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Okay2851NPOkay
.2852SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]2853LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Sorry2854JJsorry
,2855,,
but2856CCbut
there2857RBthere
...2858:...
there2859EXthere
's2860VBZbe
the2861DTthe
pitch2862NNpitch
.2863SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]2864LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Sure2865NPSure
.2866SENT.
So2867INso
a2868DTa
few2869JJfew
things2870NNSthing
.2871SENT.
First2872JJfirst
of2873INof
all2874DTall
,2875,,
it2876PPit
is2877VBZbe
...2878:...
it2879PPit
is2880VBZbe
an2881DTan
enormously2882RBenormously
complicated2883JJcomplicated
and2884CCand
controversial2885JJcontroversial
issue2886NNissue
,2887,,
what2888WPwhat
to2889TOto
do2890VVdo
with2891INwith
the2892DTthe
Illinois2893NPIllinois
Brick2894NPBrick
doctrine2895NNdoctrine
.2896SENT.
You2897PPyou
can2898MDcan
see2899VVsee
this2900DTthis
in2901RPin
...2902:...
in2903INin
the2904DTthe
briefing2905NNbriefing
in2906INin
this2907DTthis
case2908NNcase
where2909WRBwhere
,2910,,
yes2911UHyes
,2912,,
you2913PPyou
did2914VVDdo
have2915VHhave
states2916NNSstate
saying2917VVGsay
repeal2918NNrepeal
it2919PPit
.2920SENT.
You2921PPyou
also2922RBalso
had2923VHDhave
the2924DTthe
plaintiffs2925NNSplaintiff
'2926POS'
bar2927NNbar
through2928INthrough
the2929DTthe
American2930NPAmerican
Antitrust2931NPAntitrust
Institute2932NPInstitute
say2933VVPsay
do2934VVPdo
n't2935RBn't
repeal2936VVrepeal
it2937PPit
.2938SENT.
There2939EXthere
have2940VHPhave
been2941VBNbe
,2942,,
I2943PPI
think2944VVPthink
,2945,,
on2946INon
the2947DTthe
order2948NNorder
of2949INof
172950CD@card@
efforts2951NNSeffort
in2952INin
Congress2953NPCongress
to2954TOto
have2955VHhave
...2956:...
have2957VHPhave
it2958PPit
changed2959VVNchange
.2960SENT.
Not2961RBnot
once2962RBonce
has2963VHZhave
it2964PPit
ever2965RBever
gotten2966VVNget
to2967TOto
the2968DTthe
floor2969NNfloor
.2970SENT.
It2971PPit
is2972VBZbe
a2973DTa
quintessentially2974RBquintessentially
controversial2975JJcontroversial
political2976JJpolitical
issue2977NNissue
which2978WDTwhich
belongs2979VVZbelong
across2980INacross
the2981DTthe
street2982NNstreet
,2983,,
not2984RBnot
here2985RBhere
.2986SENT.
I2987PPI
would2988MDwould
disagree2989VVdisagree
completely2990RBcompletely
...2991:...
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]2992LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
Why2993WRBwhy
?2994SENT?
Why2995WRBwhy
is2996VBZbe
that2997IN/thatthat
so2998RBso
if2999INif
the3000DTthe
Court3001NPCourt
created3002VVDcreate
the3003DTthe
doctrine3004NNdoctrine
in3005INin
the3006DTthe
first3007JJfirst
place3008NNplace
?3009SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]3010LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Because3011INbecause
I3012PPI
do3013VVPdo
n't3014RBn't
think3015VVthink
it3016PPit
's3017VBZbe
fair3018JJfair
to3019TOto
say3020VVsay
that3021IN/thatthat
the3022DTthe
Court3023NPCourt
just3024RBjust
created3025VVDcreate
it3026PPit
.3027SENT.
What3028WPWhat
the3029DTthe
Court3030NPCourt
did3031VVDdo
was3032VBDbe
it3033PPit
applied3034VVDapply
the3035DTthe
foundational3036JJfoundational
principle3037NNprinciple
of3038INof
all3039DTall
Section3040NPSection
43041CD4
jurisprudence3042NNjurisprudence
,3043,,
which3044WDTwhich
is3045VBZbe
the3046DTthe
proximate3047JJproximate
cause3048NNcause
principle3049NNprinciple
of3050INof
damages3051NNSdamage
not3052RBnot
going3053VVGgo
past3054INpast
the3055DTthe
first3056JJfirst
step3057NNstep
,3058,,
and3059CCand
then3060RBthen
it3061PPit
...3062:...
it3063PPit
dealt3064VVDdeal
with3065INwith
that3066DTthat
in3067INin
the3068DTthe
context3069NNcontext
of3070INof
the3071DTthe
potential3072NNpotential
for3073INfor
duplicative3074JJduplicative
pass-through3075JJpass-through
over-charge3076NNover-charge
claims3077NNSclaim
,3078,,
which3079WDTwhich
are3080VBPbe
a3081DTa
unique3082JJunique
problem3083NNproblem
in3084INin
antitrust3085JJantitrust
.3086SENT.
It3087PPit
's3088VBZbe
not3089RBnot
a3090DTa
general3091JJgeneral
problem3092NNproblem
of3093INof
all3094DTall
damage3095NNdamage
theories3096NNStheory
.3097SENT.
But3098CCbut
,3099,,
when3100WRBwhen
you3101PPyou
have3102VHPhave
over-charge3103NNSover-charge
cases3104NNScase
...3105:...
and3106CCand
this3107DTthis
gets3108VVZget
to3109TOto
Justice3110NPJustice
Gorsuch3111NPGorsuch
's3112POS's
point3113NNpoint
about3114INabout
the3115DTthe
potential3116NNpotential
for3117INfor
...3118:...
for3119INfor
duplicative3120JJduplicative
recovery3121NNrecovery
...3122:...
it3123PPit
's3124VBZbe
not3125RBnot
hypothetical3126JJhypothetical
.3127SENT.
It3128PPit
's3129VBZbe
automatic3130JJautomatic
.3131SENT.
It3132PPit
's3133VBZbe
mathematical3134JJmathematical
.3135SENT.
If3136INif
the3137DTthe
first3138JJfirst
purchaser3139NNpurchaser
gets3140VVZget
percent3141NNpercent
of3142INof
the3143DTthe
over-charge3144NNover-charge
because3145INbecause
of3146INof
Hanover3147NPHanover
Shoe3148NPShoe
,3149,,
anything3150NNanything
else3151NNelse
that3152WDTthat
is3153VBZbe
recovered3154VVNrecover
that3155DTthat
gets3156VVZget
added3157VVNadd
on3158INon
to3159TOto
that3160DTthat
is3161VBZbe
necessarily3162RBnecessarily
duplicative3163JJduplicative
,3164,,
and3165CCand
that3166DTthat
's3167VBZbe
what3168WPwhat
happens3169VVZhappen
in3170INin
the3171DTthe
district3172NNdistrict
courts3173NNScourt
.3174SENT.
You3175PPyou
get3176VVPget
the3177DTthe
direct3178JJdirect
purchasers3179NNSpurchaser
and3180CCand
the3181DTthe
direct3182JJdirect
purchasers3183NNSpurchaser
suing3184VVGsue
on3185INon
whatever3186WDTwhatever
theory3187NNtheory
optimizes3188VVZoptimize
their3189PP$their
level3190NNlevel
of3191INof
recovery3192NNrecovery
.3193SENT.
I3194PPI
'd3195MDwould
like3196VVlike
to3197TOto
reserve3198VVreserve
the3199DTthe
rest3200NNrest
of3201INof
my3202PP$my
time3203NNtime
and3204CCand
turn3205VVturn
it3206PPit
over3207RPover
to3208TOto
the3209DTthe
Solicitor3210NPSolicitor
General3211NPGeneral
at3212INat
this3213DTthis
point3214NNpoint
.3215SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]3216LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
Thank3217VVthank
you3218PPyou
,3219,,
counsel3220NNcounsel
.3221SENT.
General3222NPGeneral
Francisco3223NPFrancisco
.3224SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3225LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Mr3226NPMr
.3227SENT.
Chief3228NPChief
Justice3229NPJustice
,3230,,
and3231CCand
may3232MDmay
it3233PPit
please3234VVplease
the3235DTthe
Court3236NPCourt
:3237::
I3238PPI
'd3239MDwould
like3240VVlike
to3241TOto
begin3242VVbegin
where3243WRBwhere
Mr3244NPMr
.3245SENT.
Wall3246NPWall
left3247VVDleave
out3248RPout
,3249,,
and3250CCand
I3251PPI
think3252VVPthink
it3253PPit
addresses3254VVZaddress
many3255JJmany
of3256INof
the3257DTthe
questions3258NNSquestion
that3259WDTthat
have3260VHPhave
been3261VBNbe
asked3262VVNask
here3263RBhere
.3264SENT.
At3265INat
bottom3266NNbottom
,3267,,
Illinois3268NPIllinois
Brick3269NPBrick
and3270CCand
Hanover3271NPHanover
Shoe3272NPShoe
,3273,,
properly3274RBproperly
understood3275VVNunderstand
,3276,,
prohibit3277VVPprohibit
pass-through3278JJpass-through
theories3279NNStheory
.3280SENT.
And3281CCand
they3282PPthey
reflect3283VVPreflect
a3284DTa
basic3285JJbasic
application3286NNapplication
of3287INof
the3288DTthe
background3289NNbackground
principles3290NNSprinciple
of3291INof
proximate3292JJproximate
cause3293NNcause
that3294IN/thatthat
this3295DTthis
Court3296NPCourt
generally3297RBgenerally
reads3298VVZread
into3299INinto
statutes3300NNSstatute
of3301INof
this3302DTthis
sort3303NNsort
,3304,,
and3305CCand
,3306,,
in3307INin
particular3308JJparticular
,3309,,
the3310DTthe
rule3311NNrule
that3312IN/thatthat
damages3313NNSdamage
stop3314VVstop
at3315INat
the3316DTthe
first3317JJfirst
step3318NNstep
.3319SENT.
Here3320RBhere
,3321,,
the3322DTthe
first3323JJfirst
step3324NNstep
is3325VBZbe
the3326DTthe
app3327NPApp
maker3328NNmaker
's3329POS's
pricing3330NNpricing
decision3331NNdecision
,3332,,
because3333INbecause
the3334DTthe
Respondents3335NNSrespondent
,3336,,
the3337DTthe
consumers3338NNSconsumer
,3339,,
are3340VBPbe
injured3341VVNinjure
if3342INif
and3343CCand
only3344RBonly
if3345INif
the3346DTthe
app3347NPApp
makers3348NNSmaker
decide3349VVPdecide
to3350TOto
increase3351VVincrease
their3352PP$their
prices3353NNSprice
in3354INin
order3355NNorder
to3356TOto
recoup3357VVrecoup
...3358:...
[JUSTICE KAGAN]3359LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
General3360NPGeneral
...3361:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3362LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
...3363:...
Apple's3364NPApple's
...3365:...
[JUSTICE KAGAN]3366LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
I3367PPI
have3368VHPhave
to3369TOto
say3370VVsay
I3371PPI
find3372VVfind
that3373IN/thatthat
a3374DTa
not3375RBnot
intuitive3376JJintuitive
argument3377NNargument
,3378,,
I3379PPI
mean3380VVPmean
,3381,,
because3382INbecause
it3383PPit
just3384RBjust
seems3385VVZseem
to3386TOto
me3387PPme
that3388IN/thatthat
when3389WRBwhen
you3390PPyou
're3391VBPbe
looking3392VVGlook
at3393INat
the3394DTthe
relationship3395NNrelationship
between3396INbetween
the3397DTthe
consumer3398NNconsumer
and3399CCand
Apple3400NPApple
,3401,,
that3402IN/thatthat
there3403EXthere
is3404VBZbe
only3405RBonly
one3406CDone
step3407NNstep
.3408SENT.
I3409PPI
mean3410VVPmean
,3411,,
I3412PPI
pick3413VVPpick
up3414RPup
my3415PP$my
iPhone3416NNiPhone
.3417SENT.
I3418PPI
go3419VVPgo
to3420TOto
Apple3421NPApple
's3422POS's
App3423NPApp
Store3424NPStore
.3425SENT.
I3426PPI
pay3427VVPpay
Apple3428NPApple
directly3429RBdirectly
with3430INwith
the3431DTthe
credit3432NNcredit
card3433NNcard
information3434NNinformation
that3435IN/thatthat
I3436PPI
've3437VHPhave
supplied3438VVNsupply
to3439TOto
Apple3440NPApple
.3441SENT.
From3442INfrom
...3443:...
from3444INfrom
my3445PP$my
perspective3446NNperspective
,3447,,
I3448PPI
've3449VHPhave
just3450RBjust
engaged3451VVNengage
in3452INin
a3453DTa
one-step3454NNone-step
transaction3455NNtransaction
with3456INwith
Apple3457NPApple
.3458SENT.
And3459CCand
when3460WRBwhen
I3461PPI
come3462VVPcome
in3463INin
and3464CCand
say3465VVPsay
Apple3466NPApple
is3467VBZbe
a3468DTa
monopolist3469NNmonopolist
and3470CCand
Apple3471NPApple
is3472VBZbe
charging3473VVGcharge
a3474DTa
super-competitive3475JJsuper-competitive
price3476NNprice
by3477INby
...3478:...
by3479INby
...3480:...
by3481INby
extracting3482VVGextract
a3483DTa
commission3484NNcommission
that3485IN/thatthat
it3486PPit
can3487MDcan
only3488RBonly
extract3489VVextract
because3490INbecause
of3491INof
its3492PP$its
market3493NNmarket
power3494NNpower
,3495,,
I3496PPI
mean3497VVPmean
,3498,,
there3499EXthere
's3500VBZbe
my3501PP$my
one3502CDone
step3503NNstep
.3504SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3505LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Right3506NPRight
.3507SENT.
I3508PPI
understand3509VVPunderstand
that3510IN/thatthat
,3511,,
Your3512PP$your
Honor3513NPHonor
.3514SENT.
But3515CCbut
,3516,,
in3517INin
proximate3518JJproximate
cause3519NNcause
,3520,,
the3521DTthe
issue3522NNissue
is3523VBZbe
not3524RBnot
transactional3525JJtransactional
proximity3526NNproximity
.3527SENT.
The3528DTthe
issue3529NNissue
is3530VBZbe
proximity3531NNproximity
between3532INbetween
the3533DTthe
illegal3534JJillegal
conduct3535NNconduct
on3536INon
the3537DTthe
one3538CDone
hand3539NNhand
,3540,,
here3541RBhere
,3542,,
Apple3543NPApple
's3544POS's
monopolistic3545JJmonopolistic
over-charge3546NNover-charge
,3547,,
and3548CCand
the3549DTthe
injury3550NNinjury
to3551TOto
consumers3552NNSconsumer
on3553INon
the3554DTthe
other3555JJother
hand3556NNhand
,3557,,
here3558RBhere
,3559,,
the3560DTthe
higher3561JJRhigh
prices3562NNSprice
.3563SENT.
And3564CCand
Apple3565NPApple
's3566POS's
monopolistic3567JJmonopolistic
over-charge3568NNover-charge
is3569VBZbe
not3570RBnot
the3571DTthe
direct3572JJdirect
cause3573NNcause
of3574INof
higher3575JJRhigh
prices3576NNSprice
.3577SENT.
The3578DTthe
direct3579JJdirect
cause3580NNcause
of3581INof
the3582DTthe
higher3583JJRhigh
prices3584NNSprice
is3585VBZbe
the3586DTthe
app3587NPApp
maker3588NNmaker
's3589POS's
decision3590NNdecision
to3591TOto
increase3592VVincrease
their3593PP$their
prices3594NNSprice
in3595INin
order3596NNorder
to3597TOto
recoup3598VVrecoup
the3599DTthe
over-charge3600NNover-charge
.3601SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]3602LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
How3603WRBHow
do3604VVPdo
we3605PPwe
know3606VVPknow
that3607RBthat
?3608SENT?
How3609WRBHow
do3610VVPdo
we3611PPwe
know3612VVPknow
that3613IN/thatthat
,3614,,
given3615VVNgive
that3616IN/thatthat
Apple3617NPApple
really3618RBreally
operates3619VVZoperate
as3620INas
a3621DTa
retailer3622NNretailer
in3623INin
many3624JJmany
respects3625NNSrespect
here3626RBhere
,3627,,
as3628INas
Justice3629NPJustice
Kagan3630NPKagan
points3631VVZpoint
out3632RPout
?3633SENT?
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3634LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Right3635NPRight
.3636SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]3637LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
And3638CCand
how3639WRBhow
do3640VVPdo
we3641PPwe
know3642VVPknow
that3643IN/thatthat
the3644DTthe
303645CD@card@
percent3646NNpercent
charge3647NNcharge
is3648VBZbe
not3649RBnot
affecting3650VVGaffect
the3651DTthe
price3652NNprice
?3653SENT?
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3654LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Well3655UHwell
,3656,,
you3657PPyou
do3658VVPdo
n't3659RBn't
know3660VVknow
...3661:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]3662LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
In3663INin
the3664DTthe
same3665JJsame
way3666NNway
that3667IN/thatthat
any3668DTany
retailer3669NNretailer
that3670WDTthat
adds3671VVZadd
303672CD@card@
percent3673NNpercent
would3674MDwould
affect3675VVaffect
the3676DTthe
ultimate3677JJultimate
price3678NNprice
paid3679VVNpay
by3680INby
the3681DTthe
consumer3682NNconsumer
?3683SENT?
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3684LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
You3685PPyou
do3686VVPdo
n't3687RBn't
know3688VVknow
for3689INfor
sure3690JJsure
,3691,,
but3692CCbut
that3693DTthat
's3694VBZbe
the3695DTthe
whole3696JJwhole
point3697NNpoint
.3698SENT.
Here3699RBhere
,3700,,
because3701INbecause
app3702NPApp
makers3703NNSmaker
set3704VVDset
the3705DTthe
final3706JJfinal
price3707NNprice
,3708,,
they3709PPthey
have3710VHPhave
a3711DTa
choice3712NNchoice
to3713TOto
make3714VVmake
:3715::
They3716PPthey
either3717RBeither
absorb3718VVabsorb
the3719DTthe
over-charge3720NNover-charge
and3721CCand
keep3722VVkeep
prices3723NNSprice
the3724DTthe
same3725JJsame
,3726,,
in3727INin
which3728WDTwhich
case3729NNcase
the3730DTthe
consumers3731NNSconsumer
are3732VBPbe
n't3733RBn't
harmed3734VVNharm
at3735INat
all3736DTall
,3737,,
or3738CCor
they3739PPthey
increase3740VVPincrease
their3741PP$their
prices3742NNSprice
to3743TOto
recoup3744VVrecoup
the3745DTthe
over-charge3746NNover-charge
,3747,,
in3748INin
which3749WDTwhich
case3750NNcase
the3751DTthe
app3752NPApp
makers3753NNSmaker
are3754VBPbe
also3755RBalso
harmed3756VVNharm
because3757INbecause
they3758PPthey
face3759VVPface
a3760DTa
drop3761NNdrop
in3762INin
sales3763NNSsale
as3764INas
a3765DTa
result3766NNresult
of3767INof
increased3768VVNincrease
prices3769NNSprice
.3770SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]3771LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
But3772CCbut
the3773DTthe
consumers3774NNSconsumer
are3775VBPbe
harmed3776VVNharm
then3777RBthen
too3778RBtoo
.3779SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3780LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Yes3781NPYes
,3782,,
Your3783PP$your
Honor3784NPHonor
.3785SENT.
And3786CCand
that3787DTthat
's3788VBZbe
the3789DTthe
whole3790JJwhole
point3791NNpoint
of3792INof
Illinois3793NPIllinois
Brick3794NPBrick
and3795CCand
Hanover3796NPHanover
Shoe3797NPShoe
.3798SENT.
When3799WRBwhen
you3800PPyou
've3801VHPhave
got3802VVNget
part3803NNpart
of3804INof
the3805DTthe
harm3806NNharm
going3807VVGgo
to3808TOto
that3809DTthat
initial3810JJinitial
party3811NNparty
that3812WDTthat
's3813VBZbe
bearing3814VVGbear
the3815DTthe
full3816JJfull
brunt3817NNbrunt
of3818INof
the3819DTthe
over-charge3820NNover-charge
in3821INin
the3822DTthe
first3823JJfirst
instance3824NNinstance
because3825INbecause
of3826INof
its3827PP$its
pricing3828NNpricing
decision3829NNdecision
,3830,,
that3831WDTthat
's3832VBZbe
the3833DTthe
party3834NNparty
that3835WDTthat
gets3836VVZget
the3837DTthe
whole3838JJwhole
claim3839NNclaim
.3840SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]3841LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
But3842CCbut
we3843PPwe
have3844VHPhave
ambiguity3845NNambiguity
about3846INabout
what3847WPwhat
Illinois3848NPIllinois
Brick3849NPBrick
means3850VVZmean
here3851RBhere
,3852,,
and3853CCand
should3854MDshould
n't3855RBn't
that3856DTthat
ambiguity3857NNambiguity
,3858,,
if3859INif
...3860:...
if3861INif
there3862EXthere
is3863VBZbe
such3864JJsuch
ambiguity3865NNambiguity
,3866,,
be3867VBbe
resolved3868VVNresolve
by3869INby
looking3870VVGlook
at3871INat
the3872DTthe
text3873NNtext
of3874INof
the3875DTthe
statute3876NNstatute
?3877SENT?
Any3878DTany
person3879NNperson
injured3880VVNinjure
?3881SENT?
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3882LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Yes3883NPYes
,3884,,
Your3885PP$your
Honor3886NPHonor
.3887SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]3888LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
That3889DTthat
's3890VBZbe
broad3891JJbroad
.3892SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3893LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
And3894CCand
what3895WPwhat
I3896PPI
think3897VVPthink
that3898IN/thatthat
Illinois3899NPIllinois
Brick3900NPBrick
reflects3901VVZreflect
is3902VBZbe
the3903DTthe
type3904NNtype
of3905INof
statutory3906JJstatutory
interpretation3907NNinterpretation
that3908IN/thatthat
this3909DTthis
Court3910NPCourt
has3911VHZhave
engaged3912VVNengage
in3913RPin
in3914INin
a3915DTa
variety3916NNvariety
of3917INof
cases3918NNScase
,3919,,
including3920VVGinclude
the3921DTthe
RICO3922NPRICO
cases3923NNScase
,3924,,
including3925VVGinclude
the3926DTthe
Lexmark3927NPLexmark
cases3928NNScase
,3929,,
where3930WRBwhere
you3931PPyou
interpret3932VVPinterpret
background3933NNbackground
principles3934NNSprinciple
of3935INof
proximate3936JJproximate
cause3937NNcause
to3938TOto
be3939VBbe
built3940VVNbuild
into3941INinto
the3942DTthe
statute3943NNstatute
,3944,,
including3945VVGinclude
the3946DTthe
rule3947NNrule
that3948IN/thatthat
damages3949NNSdamage
stop3950VVstop
at3951INat
the3952DTthe
first3953JJfirst
step3954NNstep
.3955SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]3956LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
Does3957VVZdo
it3958PPit
make3959VVmake
a3960DTa
difference3961NNdifference
,3962,,
General3963NPGeneral
,3964,,
that3965WDTthat
...3966:...
that3967IN/thatthat
Apple3968NPApple
is3969VBZbe
influencing3970VVGinfluence
the3971DTthe
prices3972NNSprice
here3973RBhere
?3974SENT?
In3975INin
other3976JJother
words3977NNSword
,3978,,
this3979DTthis
is3980VBZbe
...3981:...
you3982PPyou
're3983VBPbe
suggesting3984VVGsuggest
that3985IN/thatthat
the3986DTthe
app3987NPApp
developers3988NNSdeveloper
are3989VBPbe
just3990RBjust
sort3991NNsort
of3992INof
setting3993VVGset
these3994DTthese
prices3995NNSprice
independently3996RBindependently
...3997:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]3998LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Uh-huh3999NPUh-huh
.4000SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]4001LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
...4002:...
but4003CCbut
I4004PPI
'll4005MDwill
give4006VVgive
you4007PPyou
sort4008VVsort
of4009INof
two4010CDtwo
ways4011NNSway
in4012INin
which4013WDTwhich
that4014DTthat
's4015VBZbe
not4016RBnot
true4017JJtrue
.4018SENT.
The4019DTthe
first4020JJfirst
way4021NNway
is4022VBZbe
this4023DTthis
994024CD@card@
cent4025NNcent
charge4026NNcharge
...4027:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4028LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Uh-huh4029NPUh-huh
.4030SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]4031LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
...4032:...
which4033WDTwhich
you4034PPyou
might4035MDmight
say4036VVsay
,4037,,
well4038RBwell
,4039,,
that4040WDTthat
does4041VVZdo
n't4042RBn't
matter4043VVmatter
because4044INbecause
,4045,,
you4046PPyou
know4047VVPknow
,4048,,
it4049PPit
could4050MDcould
be4051VBbe
994052CD@card@
cents4053NNScent
or4054CCor
it4055PPit
could4056MDcould
be4057VBbe
234058RB@card@
$4059$$
1004060CD@card@
.4061SENT.
994062CD@card@
.4063SENT.
But4064CCbut
,4065,,
in4066INin
fact4067NNfact
,4068,,
these4069DTthese
are4070VBPbe
all4071DTall
low-cost4072JJlow-cost
products4073NNSproduct
for4074INfor
the4075DTthe
most4076JJSmost
part4077NNpart
.4078SENT.
So4079RBso
saying4080VVGsay
a4081DTa
price4082NNprice
has4083VHZhave
to4084TOto
end4085VVend
with4086INwith
the4087DTthe
...4088:...
you4089PPyou
know4090VVPknow
,4091,,
the4092DTthe
...4093:...
the4094DTthe
number4095NNnumber
994096CD@card@
is4097VBZbe
saying4098VVGsay
a4099DTa
lot4100NNlot
about4101INabout
the4102DTthe
fact4103NNfact
that4104IN/thatthat
you4105PPyou
can4106MDcan
't4107RB't
charge4108NNcharge
774109CD@card@
cents4110NNScent
or4111CCor
554112CD@card@
cents4113NNScent
...4114:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4115LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Sure4116NPSure
.4117SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]4118LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
...4119:...
or4120CCor
324121CD@card@
cents4122NNScent
.4123SENT.
So4124RBso
that4125DTthat
's4126VBZbe
one4127CDone
.4128SENT.
And4129CCand
the4130DTthe
other4131JJother
is4132VBZbe
the4133DTthe
entire4134JJentire
allegation4135NNallegation
here4136RBhere
is4137VBZbe
that4138IN/thatthat
Apple4139NPApple
is4140VBZbe
truly4141RBtruly
a4142DTa
monopolist4143NNmonopolist
on4144INon
both4145DTboth
sides4146NNSside
of4147INof
the4148DTthe
market4149NNmarket
.4150SENT.
It4151PPit
's4152VBZbe
able4153JJable
to4154TOto
dictate4155VVdictate
to4156TOto
developers4157NNSdeveloper
whatever4158WDTwhatever
price4159VVPprice
structure4160NNstructure
it4161PPit
wants4162VVZwant
,4163,,
and4164CCand
it4165PPit
's4166VBZbe
also4167RBalso
able4168JJable
to4169TOto
dictate4170VVdictate
to4171TOto
consumers4172NNSconsumer
what4173WPwhat
the4174DTthe
nature4175NNnature
of4176INof
the4177DTthe
sale4178NNsale
is4179VBZbe
going4180VVGgo
to4181TOto
be4182VBbe
.4183SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4184LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Right4185NPRight
.4186SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]4187LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
And4188CCand
in4189INin
that4190DTthat
event4191NNevent
,4192,,
it4193PPit
...4194:...
it4195PPit
sure4196RBsure
seems4197VVZseem
as4198RBas
though4199RBthough
,4200,,
you4201PPyou
know4202VVPknow
,4203,,
Apple4204NPApple
...4205:...
you4206PPyou
know4207VVPknow
,4208,,
it4209PPit
happened4210VVDhappen
to4211TOto
set4212VVset
up4213RPup
this4214DTthis
commission4215NNcommission
that4216WDTthat
puts4217VVZput
it4218PPit
in4219INin
the4220DTthe
ambit4221NNambit
of4222INof
Illinois4223NPIllinois
Brick4224NPBrick
,4225,,
but4226CCbut
it4227PPit
could4228MDcould
have4229VHhave
done4230VVNdo
a4231DTa
thousand4232CDthousand
other4233JJother
things4234NNSthing
that4235WDTthat
are4236VBPbe
essentially4237RBessentially
the4238DTthe
same4239JJsame
that4240WDTthat
would4241MDwould
have4242VHhave
taken4243VVNtake
it4244PPit
out4245RPout
of4246INof
the4247DTthe
Illinois4248NPIllinois
Brick4249NPBrick
rule4250NNrule
.4251SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4252LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Sure4253NPSure
.4254SENT.
And4255CCand
let4256VVlet
me4257PPme
take4258VVtake
those4259DTthose
points4260NNSpoint
in4261INin
turn4262NNturn
.4263SENT.
First4264RBfirst
,4265,,
the4266DTthe
994267CD@card@
cent4268NNcent
pricing4269NNpricing
policy4270NNpolicy
.4271SENT.
The4272DTthe
first4273JJfirst
thing4274NNthing
I4275PPI
'll4276MDwill
point4277VVpoint
out4278RPout
is4279VBZbe
it4280PPit
's4281VBZbe
not4282RBnot
in4283INin
the4284DTthe
complaint4285NNcomplaint
,4286,,
but4287CCbut
we4288PPwe
'll4289MDwill
put4290VVput
that4291IN/thatthat
to4292TOto
the4293DTthe
side4294NNside
and4295CCand
assume4296VVPassume
that4297IN/thatthat
it4298PPit
's4299VBZbe
part4300NNpart
of4301INof
this4302DTthis
case4303NNcase
.4304SENT.
Here4305RBhere
,4306,,
I4307PPI
do4308VVPdo
n't4309RBn't
think4310VVthink
it4311PPit
changes4312VVZchange
the4313DTthe
fact4314NNfact
that4315IN/thatthat
the4316DTthe
app4317NPApp
makers4318NNSmaker
still4319RBstill
control4320VVPcontrol
the4321DTthe
overall4322JJoverall
price4323NNprice
,4324,,
and4325CCand
to4326TOto
the4327DTthe
extent4328NNextent
that4329WDTthat
...4330:...
to4331TOto
the4332DTthe
extent4333NNextent
that4334IN/thatthat
Respondents4335NNSrespondent
are4336VBPbe
harmed4337VVNharm
by4338INby
that4339DTthat
,4340,,
it4341PPit
's4342VBZbe
based4343VVNbase
on4344INon
a4345DTa
pass-through4346JJpass-through
.4347SENT.
Look4348NNlook
,4349,,
if4350INif
I4351PPI
go4352VVPgo
to4353TOto
an4354DTan
auction4355NNauction
house4356NNhouse
and4357CCand
I4358PPI
have4359VHPhave
to4360TOto
bid4361VVbid
in4362INin
$4363$$
104364CD@card@
increments4365NNSincrement
,4366,,
nobody4367NNnobody
thinks4368VVZthink
the4369DTthe
auction4370NNauction
house4371NNhouse
is4372VBZbe
setting4373VVGset
the4374DTthe
price4375NNprice
.4376SENT.
The4377DTthe
bidders4378NNSbidder
are4379VBPbe
still4380RBstill
setting4381VVGset
the4382DTthe
price4383NNprice
.4384SENT.
And4385CCand
,4386,,
here4387RBhere
,4388,,
the4389DTthe
Respondents4390NNSrespondent
are4391VBPbe
...4392:...
[JUSTICE KAGAN]4393LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
But4394CCbut
if4395INif
you4396PPyou
have4397VHPhave
to4398TOto
bid4399VVbid
in4400INin
$4401$$
104402CD@card@
increments4403NNSincrement
and4404CCand
the4405DTthe
...4406:...
and4407CCand
the4408DTthe
true4409JJtrue
alternative4410NNalternative
prices4411NNSprice
are4412VBPbe
$4413$$
34414CD3
,4415,,
$4416$$
54417CD5
,4418,,
and4419CCand
$4420$$
74421CD7
...4422:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4423LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Right4424RBright
.4425SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]4426LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
...4427:...
then4428RBthen
,4429,,
indeed4430RBindeed
,4431,,
you4432PPyou
are4433VBPbe
setting4434VVGset
the4435DTthe
price4436NNprice
.4437SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4438LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
And4439CCand
,4440,,
well4441UHwell
,4442,,
that4443WDTthat
's4444VBZbe
my4445PP$my
second4446JJsecond
point4447NNpoint
,4448,,
Your4449PP$your
Honor4450NPHonor
.4451SENT.
Here4452RBhere
,4453,,
any4454DTany
injury4455NNinjury
is4456VBZbe
based4457VVNbase
on4458INon
a4459DTa
pass-through4460JJpass-through
because4461INbecause
app4462NPApp
makers4463NNSmaker
are4464VBPbe
either4465RBeither
going4466VVGgo
to4467TOto
round4468VVround
up4469RPup
or4470CCor
they4471PPthey
're4472VBPbe
going4473VVGgo
to4474TOto
round4475VVround
down4476RPdown
.4477SENT.
If4478INif
they4479PPthey
round4480VVPround
down4481RBdown
to4482TOto
the4483DTthe
lower4484JJRlow
cent4485NNcent
price4486NNprice
point4487NNpoint
,4488,,
the4489DTthe
consumers4490NNSconsumer
are4491VBPbe
n't4492RBn't
injured4493VVNinjure
at4494INat
all4495DTall
.4496SENT.
If4497INif
they4498PPthey
round4499VVPround
up4500RPup
to4501TOto
the4502DTthe
next4503JJnext
cent4504NNcent
price4505NNprice
point4506NNpoint
,4507,,
the4508DTthe
consumers4509NNSconsumer
are4510VBPbe
injured4511VVNinjure
as4512INas
a4513DTa
result4514NNresult
of4515INof
the4516DTthe
pass-through4517JJpass-through
theory4518NNtheory
.4519SENT.
And4520CCand
it4521PPit
's4522VBZbe
that4523DTthat
intermediating4524VVGintermediating
pricing4525NNpricing
decision4526NNdecision
that4527IN/thatthat
we4528PPwe
think4529VVPthink
that4530IN/thatthat
under4531INunder
the4532DTthe
principles4533NNSprinciple
of4534INof
proximate4535JJproximate
cause4536NNcause
that4537WDTthat
...4538:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]4539LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
General4540NPGeneral
,4541,,
the4542DTthe
problem4543NNproblem
is4544VBZbe
that4545IN/thatthat
they4546PPthey
're4547VBPbe
not4548RBnot
measuring4549VVGmeasure
damages4550NNSdamage
by4551INby
that4552DTthat
.4553SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4554LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
I4555PPI
...4556:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]4557LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
As4558INas
I4559PPI
understand4560VVPunderstand
,4561,,
they4562PPthey
're4563VBPbe
saying4564VVGsay
it4565PPit
's4566VBZbe
not4567RBnot
the4568DTthe
304569CD@card@
percent4570NNpercent
;4571:;
it4572PPit
is4573VBZbe
what4574WPwhat
the4575DTthe
price4576NNprice
would4577MDwould
be4578VBbe
if4579INif
we4580PPwe
could4581MDcould
buy4582VVbuy
apps4583NNSapps
outside4584JJoutside
of4585INof
this4586DTthis
closed4587JJclosed
loop4588NNloop
.4589SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4590LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
I4591PPI
...4592:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]4593LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
And4594CCand
it4595PPit
could4596MDcould
be4597VBbe
theoretically4598RBtheoretically
a4599DTa
lot4600NNlot
higher4601JJRhigh
than4602INthan
the4603DTthe
markup4604NNmarkup
,4605,,
it4606PPit
could4607MDcould
well4608RBwell
be4609VBbe
within4610INwithin
it4611PPit
,4612,,
but4613CCbut
the4614DTthe
point4615NNpoint
is4616VBZbe
that4617IN/thatthat
that4618DTthat
304619CD@card@
percent4620NNpercent
...4621:...
that4622DTthat
304623CD@card@
percent4624NNpercent
or4625CCor
whatever4626WDTwhatever
that4627DTthat
304628CD@card@
...4629:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4630LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Uh-huh4631NPUh-huh
.4632SENT.
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]4633LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
...4634:...
percent4635NNpercent
figure4636NNfigure
is4637VBZbe
,4638,,
is4639VBZbe
not4640RBnot
the4641DTthe
measure4642NNmeasure
of4643INof
our4644PP$our
damages4645NNSdamage
.4646SENT.
That4647DTthat
's4648VBZbe
as4649INas
I4650PPI
understand4651VVPunderstand
...4652:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4653LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Yeah4654NPYeah
...4655:...
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]4656LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
...4657:...
that4658IN/thatthat
they4659PPthey
're4660VBPbe
saying4661VVGsay
the4662DTthe
developers4663NNSdeveloper
may4664MDmay
have4665VHhave
their4666PP$their
own4667JJown
claim4668NNclaim
,4669,,
their4670PP$their
damages4671NNSdamage
likely4672RBlikely
have4673VHhave
to4674TOto
stay4675VVstay
within4676INwithin
the4677DTthe
percent4678NNpercent
,4679,,
but4680CCbut
we4681PPwe
do4682VVPdo
n't4683RBn't
measure4684VVmeasure
our4685PP$our
damages4686NNSdamage
by4687INby
that4688DTthat
.4689SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4690LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
So4691RBso
,4692,,
respectfully4693RBrespectfully
,4694,,
I4695PPI
'll4696MDwill
disagree4697VVdisagree
with4698INwith
that4699DTthat
,4700,,
and4701CCand
in4702INin
explaining4703VVGexplain
it4704PPit
,4705,,
Justice4706NPJustice
Kagan4707NPKagan
,4708,,
I4709PPI
think4710VVPthink
I4711PPI
can4712MDcan
also4713RBalso
answer4714VVanswer
the4715DTthe
second4716JJsecond
part4717NNpart
of4718INof
your4719PP$your
question4720NNquestion
.4721SENT.
The4722DTthe
harm4723NNharm
to4724TOto
the4725DTthe
consumers4726NNSconsumer
here4727RBhere
is4728VBZbe
that4729IN/thatthat
they4730PPthey
have4731VHPhave
to4732TOto
pay4733VVpay
higher4734JJRhigh
prices4735NNSprice
for4736INfor
apps4737NNSapps
,4738,,
and4739CCand
the4740DTthe
reason4741NNreason
they4742PPthey
have4743VHPhave
to4744TOto
pay4745VVpay
higher4746JJRhigh
prices4747NNSprice
for4748INfor
apps4749NNSapps
...4750:...
and4751CCand
,4752,,
Justice4753NPJustice
Kagan4754NPKagan
,4755,,
this4756DTthis
goes4757VVZgo
to4758TOto
your4759PP$your
question4760NNquestion
...4761:...
is4762VBZbe
because4763INbecause
Apple4764NPApple
controls4765VVZcontrol
the4766DTthe
pipeline4767NNpipeline
that4768WDTthat
connects4769VVZconnect
app4770JJapp
makers4771NNSmaker
on4772INon
the4773DTthe
one4774CDone
hand4775NNhand
and4776CCand
iPhone4777NNiPhone
users4778NNSuser
on4779INon
the4780DTthe
other4781JJother
.4782SENT.
And4783CCand
the4784DTthe
way4785NNway
they4786PPthey
exploit4787VVPexploit
that4788DTthat
pipeline4789NNpipeline
through4790INthrough
their4791PP$their
alleged4792JJalleged
monopoly4793NNmonopoly
is4794VBZbe
by4795INby
charging4796VVGcharge
that4797IN/thatthat
304798CD@card@
percent4799NNpercent
commission4800NNcommission
.4801SENT.
So4802INso
the4803DTthe
only4804JJonly
reason4805NNreason
consumers4806NNSconsumer
are4807VBPbe
harmed4808VVNharm
here4809RBhere
in4810INin
the4811DTthe
form4812NNform
of4813INof
paying4814VVGpay
higher4815JJRhigh
prices4816NNSprice
is4817VBZbe
because4818INbecause
the4819DTthe
app4820NPApp
makers4821NNSmaker
decide4822VVPdecide
to4823TOto
increase4824VVincrease
their4825PP$their
prices4826NNSprice
in4827INin
order4828NNorder
to4829TOto
recoup4830VVrecoup
that4831DTthat
commission4832NNcommission
.4833SENT.
And4834CCand
,4835,,
Justice4836NPJustice
Breyer4837NPBreyer
,4838,,
to4839TOto
your4840PP$your
question4841NNquestion
,4842,,
the4843DTthe
reason4844NNreason
why4845WRBwhy
this4846DTthis
makes4847VVZmake
it4848PPit
different4849JJdifferent
than4850INthan
your4851PP$your
hypothetical4852JJhypothetical
of4853INof
Bill4854NPBill
buys4855VVZbuy
from4856INfrom
Sam4857NPSam
and4858CCand
you4859PPyou
have4860VHPhave
transactional4861JJtransactional
proximity4862NNproximity
is4863VBZbe
because4864INbecause
the4865DTthe
question4866NNquestion
is4867VBZbe
n't4868RBn't
proximity4869NNproximity
between4870INbetween
the4871DTthe
parties4872NNSparty
who4873WPwho
are4874VBPbe
transacting4875VVGtransact
with4876INwith
one4877CDone
another4878DTanother
but4879CCbut
proximity4880NNproximity
between4881INbetween
the4882DTthe
antitrust4883JJantitrust
violation4884NNviolation
,4885,,
the4886DTthe
percent4887NNpercent
commission4888NNcommission
,4889,,
and4890CCand
the4891DTthe
harm4892NNharm
to4893TOto
consumers4894NNSconsumer
in4895INin
the4896DTthe
form4897NNform
of4898INof
higher4899JJRhigh
prices4900NNSprice
.4901SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]4902LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
I4903PPI
would4904MDwould
n't4905RBn't
have4906VHhave
thought4907VVNthink
that4908DTthat
was4909VBDbe
the4910DTthe
antitrust4911JJantitrust
violation4912NNviolation
.4913SENT.
I4914PPI
would4915MDwould
have4916VHhave
thought4917VVNthink
the4918DTthe
antitrust4919JJantitrust
violation4920NNviolation
is4921VBZbe
having4922VHGhave
enormous4923JJenormous
market4924NNmarket
power4925NNpower
achieved4926VVNachieve
by4927INby
not4928RBnot
patents4929NNSpatent
and4930CCand
not4931RBnot
skill4932NNskill
,4933,,
foresight4934NNforesight
,4935,,
and4936CCand
industry4937NNindustry
but4938CCbut
,4939,,
rather4940RBrather
,4941,,
anticompetitive4942JJanticompetitive
or4943CCor
more4944RBRmore
restrictive4945JJrestrictive
than4946INthan
necessary4947JJnecessary
practices4948NNSpractice
.4949SENT.
Alcoa4950NPAlcoa
...4951:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4952LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
For4953INfor
sure4954JJsure
.4955SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]4956LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
...4957:...
Alcoa4958NPAlcoa
did4959VVDdo
not4960RBnot
charge4961VVcharge
higher4962JJRhigh
than4963INthan
competitive4964JJcompetitive
prices4965NNSprice
,4966,,
and4967CCand
that4968DTthat
's4969VBZbe
why4970WRBwhy
Learned4971NPLearned
Hand4972NPHand
said4973VVDsay
the4974DTthe
easy4975JJeasy
life4976NNlife
,4977,,
not4978RBnot
necessarily4979RBnecessarily
higher4980JJRhigh
prices4981NNSprice
,4982,,
is4983VBZbe
the4984DTthe
reward4985NNreward
,4986,,
often4987RBoften
,4988,,
of4989INof
monopoly4990NNmonopoly
.4991SENT.
Now4992RBnow
...4993:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]4994LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
For4995INfor
sure4996JJsure
...4997:...
[JUSTICE BREYER]4998LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
...4999:...
I5000PPI
would5001MDwould
have5002VHhave
thought5003VVNthink
it5004PPit
's5005VBZbe
a5006DTa
matter5007NNmatter
for5008INfor
proof5009NNproof
at5010INat
the5011DTthe
damages5012NNSdamage
stage5013VVPstage
whether5014INwhether
,5015,,
in5016INin
fact5017NNfact
,5018,,
Apple5019NPApple
,5020,,
assuming5021VVGassume
they5022PPthey
prove5023VVPprove
it5024PPit
is5025VBZbe
a5026DTa
monopoly5027NNmonopoly
,5028,,
has5029VHZhave
extracted5030VVNextract
higher5031JJRhigh
than5032INthan
competitive5033JJcompetitive
prices5034NNSprice
from5035INfrom
those5036DTthose
particular5037JJparticular
people5038NNSpeople
,5039,,
the5040DTthe
plaintiffs5041NNSplaintiff
,5042,,
or5043CCor
whether5044INwhether
they5045PPthey
've5046VHPhave
just5047RBjust
had5048VHNhave
the5049DTthe
easy5050JJeasy
life5051NNlife
.5052SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5053LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Right5054NPRight
.5055SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]5056LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
Now5057RBnow
I5058PPI
do5059VVPdo
n't5060RBn't
think5061VVthink
that5062WDTthat
's5063VBZbe
the5064DTthe
stage5065NNstage
we5066PPwe
're5067VBPbe
at5068INat
in5069INin
this5070DTthis
case5071NNcase
.5072SENT.
So5073RBso
,5074,,
if5075INif
you5076PPyou
say5077VVPsay
right5078RBright
,5079,,
right5080RBright
,5081,,
right5082RBright
...5083:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5084LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Well5085UHWell
...5086:...
[JUSTICE BREYER]5087LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
...5088:...
then5089RBthen
they5090PPthey
must5091MDmust
win5092VVwin
.5093SENT.
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5094LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
...5095:...
no5096RBno
...5097:...
so5098RBso
what5099WPwhat
I5100PPI
wanted5101VVDwant
to5102TOto
say5103VVsay
is5104VBZbe
that5105IN/thatthat
,5106,,
for5107INfor
sure5108JJsure
,5109,,
the5110DTthe
Illinois5111NPIllinois
Brick5112NPBrick
theory5113NNtheory
does5114VVZdo
n't5115RBn't
apply5116VVapply
across5117INacross
the5118DTthe
board5119NNboard
,5120,,
but5121CCbut
it5122PPit
does5123VVZdo
apply5124VVapply
when5125WRBwhen
somebody5126NNsomebody
is5127VBZbe
bringing5128VVGbring
an5129DTan
over-charge5130JJover-charge
theory5131NNtheory
,5132,,
as5133RBas
in5134INin
Illinois5135NPIllinois
Brick5136NPBrick
,5137,,
as5138RBas
in5139INin
Hanover5140NPHanover
Shoe5141NPShoe
,5142,,
and5143CCand
as5144RBas
here5145RBhere
.5146SENT.
The5147DTthe
...5148:...
[JUSTICE BREYER]5149LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
Have5150NPHave
we5151PPwe
had5152VHDhave
trial5153NNtrial
on5154INon
that5155DTthat
?5156SENT?
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5157LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Your5158PP$your
Honor5159NPHonor
,5160,,
where5161WRBwhere
you5162PPyou
have5163VHPhave
that5164DTthat
kind5165NNkind
of5166INof
over-charge5167NNover-charge
theory5168NNtheory
,5169,,
what5170WPwhat
Illinois5171NPIllinois
Brick5172NPBrick
says5173VVZsay
...5174:...
asks5175VVZask
is5176VBZbe
,5177,,
under5178INunder
basic5179JJbasic
principles5180NNSprinciple
of5181INof
proximate5182JJproximate
cause5183NNcause
,5184,,
is5185VBZbe
there5186RBthere
some5187DTsome
party5188NNparty
other5189JJother
than5190INthan
the5191DTthe
monopolist5192NNmonopolist
that5193WDTthat
's5194VBZbe
standing5195VVGstand
in5196INin
between5197INbetween
the5198DTthe
plaintiffs5199NNSplaintiff
'5200POS'
injury5201NNinjury
in5202INin
the5203DTthe
form5204NNform
of5205INof
higher5206JJRhigh
prices5207NNSprice
and5208CCand
the5209DTthe
monopolist5210NNmonopolist
's5211POS's
violation5212NNviolation
in5213INin
the5214DTthe
form5215NNform
of5216INof
the5217DTthe
commission5218NNcommission
.5219SENT.
And5220CCand
whenever5221WRBwhenever
the5222DTthe
price5223NNprice
setter5224NNsetter
,5225,,
the5226DTthe
ultimate5227JJultimate
price5228NNprice
setter5229NNsetter
,5230,,
is5231VBZbe
somebody5232NNsomebody
other5233JJother
than5234INthan
the5235DTthe
monopolist5236NNmonopolist
,5237,,
it5238PPit
's5239VBZbe
never5240RBnever
the5241DTthe
monopolist5242NNmonopolist
's5243POS's
over-charge5244NNover-charge
that5245WDTthat
is5246VBZbe
the5247DTthe
direct5248JJdirect
cause5249NNcause
...5250:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]5251LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
But5252CCbut
...5253:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5254LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
...5255:...
of5256INof
the5257DTthe
injury5258NNinjury
.5259SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]5260LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
...5261:...
but5262CCbut
if5263INif
the5264DTthe
app5265NPApp
developer5266NNdeveloper
...5267:...
if5268INif
Apple5269NPApple
bought5270VVDbuy
the5271DTthe
apps5272NNSapps
from5273INfrom
the5274DTthe
app5275NPApp
developer5276NNdeveloper
and5277CCand
then5278RBthen
added5279VVDadd
305280CD@card@
percent5281NNpercent
to5282TOto
it5283PPit
and5284CCand
sold5285VVDsell
it5286PPit
to5287TOto
the5288DTthe
consumer5289NNconsumer
,5290,,
you5291PPyou
would5292MDwould
agree5293VVagree
that5294IN/thatthat
a5295DTa
claim5296NNclaim
could5297MDcould
lie5298VVlie
there5299RBthere
,5300,,
correct5301JJcorrect
?5302SENT?
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5303LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Your5304PP$your
Honor5305NPHonor
,5306,,
I5307PPI
want5308VVPwant
to5309TOto
make5310VVmake
sure5311JJsure
I5312PPI
understand5313VVPunderstand
the5314DTthe
hypothetical5315JJhypothetical
.5316SENT.
If5317INif
Apple5318NPApple
said5319VVDsay
...5320:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]5321LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
Apple5322NPApple
's5323VBZbe
buying5324VVGbuy
the5325DTthe
app5326NNapp
from5327INfrom
the5328DTthe
app5329NPApp
developer5330NNdeveloper
for5331INfor
a5332DTa
price5333NNprice
...5334:...
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5335LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Right5336NPRight
.5337SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]5338LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
...5339:...
Apple5340NPApple
's5341VBZbe
then5342RBthen
adding5343VVGadd
305344CD@card@
percent5345NNpercent
to5346TOto
that5347DTthat
price5348NNprice
and5349CCand
selling5350VVGsell
it5351PPit
to5352TOto
the5353DTthe
consumer5354NNconsumer
.5355SENT.
The5356DTthe
consumer5357NNconsumer
alleges5358VVZallege
that5359IN/thatthat
Apple5360NPApple
's5361VBZbe
doing5362VVGdo
that5363IN/thatthat
as5364INas
a5365DTa
result5366NNresult
of5367INof
monopolistic5368JJmonopolistic
behavior5369NNbehavior
.5370SENT.
The5371DTthe
claim5372NNclaim
lie5373NNlie
?5374SENT?
[GENERAL FRANCISCO]5375LOC[GENERAL FRANCISCO]
Yes5376NPYes
,5377,,
you5378PPyou
can5379MDcan
sue5380VVsue
Apple5381NPApple
directly5382RBdirectly
,5383,,
but5384CCbut
you5385PPyou
can5386MDcan
't5387RB't
sue5388VVsue
Apple5389NPApple
if5390INif
the5391DTthe
...5392:...
if5393INif
...5394:...
if5395INif
Apple5396NPApple
is5397VBZbe
n't5398RBn't
the5399DTthe
price-setting5400NNprice-setting
party5401NNparty
,5402,,
but5403CCbut
the5404DTthe
app5405NPApp
maker5406NNmaker
is5407VBZbe
the5408DTthe
price-setting5409NNprice-setting
party5410NNparty
.5411SENT.
And5412CCand
that5413DTthat
's5414VBZbe
why5415WRBwhy
...5416:...
may5417MDmay
I5418PPI
finish5419VVfinish
the5420DTthe
answer5421NNanswer
,5422,,
Your5423PP$your
Honor5424NPHonor
?5425SENT?
And5426CCand
that5427DTthat
's5428VBZbe
why5429WRBwhy
the5430DTthe
key5431NNkey
is5432VBZbe
who5433WPwho
sets5434VVZset
the5435DTthe
price5436NNprice
,5437,,
and5438CCand
it5439PPit
's5440VBZbe
very5441RBvery
hard5442JJhard
to5443TOto
manipulate5444VVmanipulate
our5445PP$our
rule5446NNrule
because5447INbecause
,5448,,
under5449INunder
our5450PP$our
rule5451NNrule
,5452,,
you5453PPyou
actually5454RBactually
have5455VHhave
to5456TOto
change5457VVchange
the5458DTthe
party5459NNparty
that5460WDTthat
has5461VHZhave
the5462DTthe
authority5463NNauthority
to5464TOto
set5465VVset
the5466DTthe
final5467JJfinal
price5468NNprice
,5469,,
and5470CCand
that5471DTthat
's5472VBZbe
a5473DTa
fundamental5474JJfundamental
change5475NNchange
in5476INin
the5477DTthe
nature5478NNnature
of5479INof
the5480DTthe
transaction5481NNtransaction
itself5482PPitself
.5483SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]5484LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
Thank5485VVthank
you5486PPyou
,5487,,
counsel5488NNcounsel
.5489SENT.
Mr5490NPMr
.5491SENT.
Frederick5492NPFrederick
.5493SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]5494LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Thank5495VVthank
you5496PPyou
,5497,,
Mr5498NPMr
.5499SENT.
Chief5500NPChief
Justice5501NPJustice
,5502,,
and5503CCand
may5504MDmay
it5505PPit
please5506VVplease
the5507DTthe
Court5508NPCourt
:5509::
Apple5510NPApple
directed5511VVDdirect
anticompetitive5512JJanticompetitive
restraints5513NNSrestraint
at5514INat
iPhone5515NNiPhone
owners5516NNSowner
to5517TOto
prevent5518VVprevent
them5519PPthem
from5520INfrom
buying5521VVGbuy
apps5522NNSapps
anywhere5523RBanywhere
other5524JJother
than5525INthan
Apple5526NPApple
's5527POS's
monopoly5528NNmonopoly
App5529NPApp
Store5530NPStore
.5531SENT.
As5532INas
a5533DTa
result5534NNresult
,5535,,
iPhone5536NNiPhone
owners5537NNSowner
paid5538VVDpay
Apple5539NPApple
more5540JJRmore
for5541INfor
apps5542NNSapps
than5543INthan
they5544PPthey
would5545MDwould
have5546VHhave
paid5547VVNpay
in5548INin
a5549DTa
competitive5550JJcompetitive
retail5551JJretail
market5552NNmarket
.5553SENT.
Under5554INunder
this5555DTthis
Court5556NPCourt
's5557POS's
precedents5558NNSprecedent
,5559,,
iPhone5560NNiPhone
owners5561NNSowner
have5562VHPhave
a5563DTa
cause5564NNcause
of5565INof
action5566NNaction
under5567INunder
Section5568NPSection
45569CD4
of5570INof
the5571DTthe
Clayton5572NPClayton
Act5573NPAct
directly5574RBdirectly
against5575INagainst
Apple5576NPApple
for5577INfor
those5578DTthose
over-charges5579NNSover-charges
.5580SENT.
The5581DTthe
court5582NNcourt
of5583INof
appeals5584NNSappeal
should5585MDshould
be5586VBbe
affirmed5587VVNaffirm
for5588INfor
three5589CDthree
reasons5590NNSreason
.5591SENT.
First5592RBfirst
,5593,,
Illinois5594NPIllinois
Brick5595NPBrick
is5596VBZbe
a5597DTa
bright-line5598NNbright-line
rule5599NNrule
that5600IN/thatthat
Respondents5601NNSrespondent
easily5602RBeasily
satisfy5603VVsatisfy
.5604SENT.
Second5605RBsecond
,5606,,
Apple5607NPApple
directed5608VVDdirect
its5609PP$its
monopoly5610NNmonopoly
abuses5611NNSabuse
at5612INat
Respondents5613NNSrespondent
.5614SENT.
So5615RBso
it5616PPit
's5617VBZbe
appropriate5618JJappropriate
that5619IN/thatthat
Respondents5620NNSrespondent
can5621MDcan
sue5622VVsue
Apple5623NPApple
for5624INfor
their5625PP$their
damages5626NNSdamage
as5627INas
a5628DTa
result5629NNresult
of5630INof
those5631DTthose
violations5632NNSviolation
.5633SENT.
And5634CCand
,5635,,
third5636JJthird
,5637,,
Apple5638NPApple
seeks5639VVZseek
to5640TOto
expand5641VVexpand
and5642CCand
modify5643VVmodify
the5644DTthe
bright-line5645NNbright-line
rule5646NNrule
of5647INof
Illinois5648NPIllinois
Brick5649NPBrick
to5650TOto
deny5651VVdeny
indisputably5652RBindisputably
direct5653JJdirect
purchasers5654NNSpurchaser
an5655DTan
antitrust5656JJantitrust
remedy5657NNremedy
and5658CCand
to5659TOto
change5660VVchange
the5661DTthe
rule5662NNrule
into5663INinto
a5664DTa
standardless5665JJstandardless
inquiry5666NNinquiry
that5667WDTthat
will5668MDwill
be5669VBbe
hard5670JJhard
to5671TOto
apply5672VVapply
at5673INat
the5674DTthe
pleadings5675NNSpleading
stage5676NNstage
.5677SENT.
Now5678RBnow
,5679,,
if5680INif
I5681PPI
could5682MDcould
return5683VVreturn
to5684TOto
the5685DTthe
first5686JJfirst
point5687NNpoint
,5688,,
the5689DTthe
direct5690JJdirect
purchaser5691NNpurchaser
rule5692NNrule
is5693VBZbe
a5694DTa
bright-line5695NNbright-line
rule5696NNrule
.5697SENT.
This5698DTthis
Court5699NPCourt
said5700VVDsay
so5701RBso
in5702INin
Illinois5703NPIllinois
Brick5704NPBrick
and5705CCand
,5706,,
importantly5707RBimportantly
,5708,,
a5709DTa
case5710NNcase
that5711WDTthat
has5712VHZhave
not5713RBnot
yet5714RByet
been5715VBNbe
discussed5716VVNdiscuss
today5717NNtoday
,5718,,
in5719INin
UtiliCorp5720NPUtiliCorp
,5721,,
in5722INin
which5723WDTwhich
the5724DTthe
Court5725NPCourt
said5726VVDsay
Illinois5727NPIllinois
Brick5728NPBrick
is5729VBZbe
a5730DTa
bright-line5731NNbright-line
rule5732NNrule
for5733INfor
direct5734JJdirect
purchasers5735NNSpurchaser
,5736,,
notwithstanding5737INnotwithstanding
the5738DTthe
economics5739NNSeconomics
that5740WDTthat
go5741VVPgo
into5742INinto
that5743DTthat
.5744SENT.
UtiliCorp5745NPUtiliCorp
was5746VBDbe
a5747DTa
case5748NNcase
that5749WDTthat
protected5750VVDprotect
the5751DTthe
defendants5752NNSdefendant
,5753,,
who5754WPwho
were5755VBDbe
asserting5756VVGassert
that5757DTthat
...5758:...
who5759WPwho
...5760:...
who5761WPwho
were5762VBDbe
asserting5763VVGassert
that5764IN/thatthat
the5765DTthe
...5766:...
that5767IN/thatthat
there5768EXthere
was5769VBDbe
a5770DTa
break5771NNbreak
in5772INin
the5773DTthe
link5774NNlink
of5775INof
the5776DTthe
chain5777NNchain
.5778SENT.
This5779DTthis
case5780NNcase
is5781VBZbe
really5782RBreally
the5783DTthe
flip5784JJflip
side5785NNside
of5786INof
that5787WDTthat
to5788TOto
protect5789VVprotect
plaintiffs5790NNSplaintiff
who5791WPwho
directly5792RBdirectly
purchased5793VVDpurchase
from5794INfrom
the5795DTthe
alleged5796JJalleged
antitrust5797JJantitrust
violator5798NNviolator
and5799CCand
are5800VBPbe
claiming5801VVGclaim
damages5802NNSdamage
as5803INas
a5804DTa
result5805NNresult
of5806INof
that5807DTthat
antitrust5808JJantitrust
violation5809NNviolation
.5810SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]5811LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
There's5812NPThere's
...5813:...
there5814EXthere
's5815VBZbe
one5816CDone
antitrust5817JJantitrust
violation5818NNviolation
under5819INunder
your5820PP$your
theory5821NNtheory
,5822,,
which5823WDTwhich
is5824VBZbe
the5825DTthe
increase5826NNincrease
,5827,,
the5828DTthe
305829CD@card@
percent5830NNpercent
increase5831NNincrease
that5832IN/thatthat
Apple5833NPApple
imposes5834VVZimpose
when5835WRBwhen
it5836PPit
...5837:...
when5838WRBwhen
it5839PPit
's5840VBZbe
...5841:...
when5842WRBwhen
,5843,,
as5844INas
you5845PPyou
put5846VVPput
it5847PPit
,5848,,
it5849PPit
sells5850VVZsell
the5851DTthe
apps5852NNSapps
?5853SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]5854LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Wrong5855JJwrong
.5856SENT.
And5857CCand
this5858DTthis
is5859VBZbe
very5860RBvery
important5861JJimportant
for5862INfor
the5863DTthe
Court5864NPCourt
to5865TOto
understand5866VVunderstand
.5867SENT.
The5868DTthe
antitrust5869JJantitrust
violation5870NNviolation
here5871RBhere
is5872VBZbe
the5873DTthe
monopoly5874NNmonopoly
App5875NPApp
Store5876NPStore
.5877SENT.
Consumers5878NNSconsumer
cannot5879MDcan
buy5880VVbuy
an5881DTan
app5882NNapp
anywhere5883RBanywhere
other5884JJother
than5885INthan
Apple5886NPApple
's5887POS's
1005888CD@card@
percent-owned5889JJpercent-owned
monopoly5890NNmonopoly
App5891NPApp
Store5892NPStore
.5893SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]5894LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
But5895CCbut
,5896,,
when5897WRBwhen
it5898PPit
comes5899VVZcome
to5900TOto
the5901DTthe
...5902:...
the5903DTthe
305904CD@card@
percent5905NNpercent
increase5906NNincrease
,5907,,
you5908PPyou
're5909VBPbe
...5910:...
you5911PPyou
're5912VBPbe
obviously5913RBobviously
saying5914VVGsay
the5915DTthe
purchasers5916NNSpurchaser
,5917,,
again5918RBagain
,5919,,
under5920INunder
your5921PP$your
theory5922NNtheory
of5923INof
the5924DTthe
apps5925NNSapps
,5926,,
are5927VBPbe
harmed5928VVNharm
by5929INby
that5930DTthat
and5931CCand
recover5932VVrecover
...5933:...
can5934MDcan
recover5935VVrecover
damages5936NNSdamage
for5937INfor
that5938DTthat
,5939,,
and5940CCand
also5941RBalso
that5942IN/thatthat
the5943DTthe
developers5944NNSdeveloper
are5945VBPbe
harmed5946VVNharm
by5947INby
that5948DTthat
and5949CCand
they5950PPthey
can5951MDcan
recover5952VVrecover
damages5953NNSdamage
for5954INfor
it5955PPit
as5956RBas
well5957RBwell
.5958SENT.
In5959INin
other5960JJother
words5961NNSword
,5962,,
to5963TOto
the5964DTthe
extent5965NNextent
it5966PPit
might5967MDmight
be5968VBbe
said5969VVNsay
that5970IN/thatthat
Apple5971NPApple
is5972VBZbe
a5973DTa
two-sided5974JJtwo-sided
market5975NNmarket
,5976,,
they5977PPthey
're5978VBPbe
...5979:...
they5980PPthey
're5981VBPbe
subject5982JJsubject
to5983TOto
suit5984VVsuit
on5985INon
both5986DTboth
sides5987NNSside
of5988INof
the5989DTthe
market5990NNmarket
for5991INfor
a5992DTa
single5993JJsingle
antitrust5994JJantitrust
price5995NNprice
increase5996NNincrease
that5997IN/thatthat
they5998PPthey
're5999VBPbe
alleged6000VVNallege
to6001TOto
have6002VHhave
imposed6003VVNimpose
.6004SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]6005LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
So6006RBso
,6007,,
Mr6008NPMr
.6009SENT.
Chief6010NPChief
Justice6011NPJustice
,6012,,
I6013PPI
think6014VVPthink
that6015IN/thatthat
your6016PP$your
question6017NNquestion
kind6018NNkind
of6019INof
gets6020VVZget
to6021TOto
the6022DTthe
core6023NNcore
of6024INof
a6025DTa
lot6026NNlot
of6027INof
the6028DTthe
confusion6029NNconfusion
here6030RBhere
because6031RBbecause
,6032,,
by6033INby
having6034VHGhave
an6035DTan
wholly-owned6036VVNwholly-own
monopoly6037NNmonopoly
App6038NPApp
Store6039NPStore
,6040,,
Apple6041NPApple
is6042VBZbe
able6043JJable
to6044TOto
distort6045VVdistort
the6046DTthe
market6047NNmarket
at6048INat
the6049DTthe
supply6050NNsupply
chain6051NNchain
and6052CCand
at6053INat
the6054DTthe
retail6055JJretail
chain6056NNchain
for6057INfor
consumers6058NNSconsumer
.6059SENT.
We6060PPwe
,6061,,
representing6062VVGrepresent
consumer6063NNconsumer
iPhone6064NNiPhone
owners6065NNSowner
,6066,,
are6067VBPbe
suing6068VVGsue
only6069RBonly
for6070INfor
the6071DTthe
damages6072NNSdamage
that6073WDTthat
we6074PPwe
incur6075VVPincur
.6076SENT.
That6077DTthat
is6078VBZbe
the6079DTthe
higher6080JJRhigh
than6081INthan
what6082WPwhat
a6083DTa
competitive6084JJcompetitive
market6085NNmarket
price6086NNprice
would6087MDwould
be6088VBbe
for6089INfor
apps6090NNSapps
.6091SENT.
Our6092PP$our
measure6093NNmeasure
of6094INof
damages6095NNSdamage
is6096VBZbe
not6097RBnot
necessarily6098RBnecessarily
the6099DTthe
306100CD@card@
percent6101NNpercent
.6102SENT.
The6103DTthe
306104CD@card@
percent6105NNpercent
is6106VBZbe
simply6107RBsimply
proof6108JJproof
that6109IN/thatthat
Apple6110NPApple
is6111VBZbe
acting6112VVGact
as6113INas
a6114DTa
monopolist6115NNmonopolist
because6116INbecause
it6117PPit
extracts6118VVZextract
...6119:...
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]6120LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
No6121UHNo
,6122,,
no6123UHno
,6124,,
I6125PPI
understand6126VVPunderstand
...6127:...
I6128PPI
understand6129VVPunderstand
your6130PP$your
claim6131NNclaim
on6132INon
your6133PP$your
side6134NNside
of6135INof
the6136DTthe
market6137NNmarket
.6138SENT.
But6139CCbut
you6140PPyou
do6141VVPdo
think6142VVthink
that6143IN/thatthat
the6144DTthe
developers6145NNSdeveloper
have6146VHPhave
a6147DTa
claim6148NNclaim
as6149INas
well6150RBwell
,6151,,
do6152VVPdo
n't6153RBn't
you6154PPyou
?6155SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]6156LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well6157UHwell
,6158,,
I6159PPI
have6160VHPhave
no6161DTno
grief6162NNgrief
...6163:...
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]6164LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
It6165PPit
's6166VBZbe
the6167DTthe
same6168JJsame
?6169SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]6170LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
I6171PPI
have6172VHPhave
...6173:...
it6174PPit
's6175VBZbe
not6176RBnot
the6177DTthe
same6178JJsame
.6179SENT.
It6180PPit
is6181VBZbe
a6182DTa
different6183JJdifferent
claim6184NNclaim
.6185SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]6186LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
For6187INfor
...6188:...
for6189INfor
the6190DTthe
same6191JJsame
price6192NNprice
increase6193NNincrease
...6194:...
[MR. FREDERICK]6195LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
No6196NPNo
...6197:...
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]6198LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
...6199:...
for6200INfor
the6201DTthe
same6202JJsame
...6203:...
[MR. FREDERICK]6204LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
...6205:...
I6206PPI
disagree6207VVPdisagree
with6208INwith
that6209DTthat
,6210,,
Mr6211NPMr
.6212SENT.
Chief6213NPChief
Justice6214NPJustice
.6215SENT.
Apple6216NPApple
's6217POS's
supplier6218NNsupplier
of6219INof
the6220DTthe
apps6221NNSapps
,6222,,
if6223INif
they6224PPthey
have6225VHPhave
a6226DTa
claim6227NNclaim
,6228,,
it6229PPit
is6230VBZbe
that6231IN/thatthat
Apple6232NPApple
has6233VHZhave
distorted6234VVNdistort
the6235DTthe
market6236NNmarket
for6237INfor
the6238DTthe
supply6239NNsupply
of6240INof
apps6241NNSapps
in6242INin
a6243DTa
way6244NNway
that6245WDTthat
hurts6246VVZhurt
app6247NPApp
developers6248NNSdeveloper
'6249POS'
profits6250NNSprofit
.6251SENT.
Their6252PP$their
argument6253NNargument
would6254MDwould
be6255VBbe
,6256,,
if6257INif
we6258PPwe
were6259VBDbe
n't6260RBn't
suffering6261VVGsuffer
under6262INunder
the6263DTthe
one6264CDone
monopoly6265NNmonopoly
store6266NNstore
constraint6267NNconstraint
,6268,,
we6269PPwe
might6270MDmight
be6271VBbe
able6272JJable
to6273TOto
charge6274VVcharge
a6275DTa
different6276JJdifferent
price6277NNprice
lower6278JJRlow
than6279INthan
996280CD@card@
cents6281NNScent
and6282CCand
be6283VBbe
able6284JJable
to6285TOto
get6286VVget
a6287DTa
direct6288JJdirect
purchase6289NNpurchase
from6290INfrom
an6291DTan
iPhone6292JJiPhone
Apple6293NPApple
owner6294NNowner
.6295SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]6296LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
Well6297UHwell
,6298,,
I6299PPI
think6300VVPthink
you6301PPyou
're6302VBPbe
just6303RBjust
saying6304VVGsay
that6305IN/thatthat
the6306DTthe
measure6307NNmeasure
of6308INof
damages6309NNSdamage
would6310MDwould
be6311VBbe
different6312JJdifferent
between6313INbetween
the6314DTthe
two6315CDtwo
sides6316NNSside
of6317INof
the6318DTthe
market6319NNmarket
?6320SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]6321LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
And6322CCand
...6323:...
but6324CCbut
they6325PPthey
would6326MDwould
be6327VBbe
different6328JJdifferent
damages6329NNSdamage
.6330SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]6331LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
In6332INin
other6333JJother
words6334NNSword
,6335,,
you6336PPyou
are6337VBPbe
saying6338VVGsay
the6339DTthe
consumer6340NNconsumer
says6341VVZsay
,6342,,
I6343PPI
'm6344VBPbe
paying6345VVGpay
a6346DTa
higher6347JJRhigh
price6348NNprice
for6349INfor
the6350DTthe
product6351NNproduct
.6352SENT.
It6353PPit
might6354MDmight
be6355VBbe
the6356DTthe
entire6357JJentire
306358CD@card@
percent6359NNpercent
commission6360NNcommission
,6361,,
it6362PPit
might6363MDmight
be6364VBbe
some6365DTsome
portion6366NNportion
of6367INof
the6368DTthe
306369CD@card@
percent6370NNpercent
commission6371NNcommission
,6372,,
that6373WDTthat
's6374VBZbe
super-competitive6375JJsuper-competitive
,6376,,
but6377CCbut
I6378PPI
'm6379VBPbe
paying6380VVGpay
a6381DTa
higher6382JJRhigh
price6383NNprice
for6384INfor
the6385DTthe
product6386NNproduct
.6387SENT.
And6388CCand
the6389DTthe
app6390NPApp
developer6391NNdeveloper
says6392VVZsay
:6393::
Well6394UHWell
,6395,,
I6396PPI
do6397VVPdo
n't6398RBn't
...6399:...
you6400PPyou
know6401VVPknow
,6402,,
that6403WDTthat
's6404VBZbe
irrelevant6405JJirrelevant
to6406TOto
me6407PPme
.6408SENT.
I6409PPI
do6410VVPdo
n't6411RBn't
have6412VHhave
to6413TOto
buy6414VVbuy
the6415DTthe
product6416NNproduct
.6417SENT.
What6418WPWhat
's6419VBZbe
relevant6420JJrelevant
to6421TOto
me6422PPme
is6423VBZbe
fewer6424JJRfew
people6425NNSpeople
are6426VBPbe
buying6427VVGbuy
my6428PP$my
apps6429NNSapps
.6430SENT.
And6431CCand
that6432DTthat
represents6433VVZrepresent
some6434DTsome
amount6435NNamount
of6436INof
lost6437JJlost
profits6438NNSprofit
.6439SENT.
But6440CCbut
those6441DTthose
two6442CDtwo
things6443NNSthing
are6444VBPbe
not6445RBnot
...6446:...
I6447PPI
mean6448VVPmean
,6449,,
it6450PPit
is6451VBZbe
true6452JJtrue
that6453IN/thatthat
two6454CDtwo
people6455NNSpeople
are6456VBPbe
being6457VBGbe
able6458JJable
to6459TOto
sue6460VVsue
because6461INbecause
Apple6462NPApple
is6463VBZbe
...6464:...
is6465VBZbe
transacting6466VVGtransact
with6467INwith
each6468DTeach
of6469INof
these6470DTthese
people6471NNSpeople
and6472CCand
each6473DTeach
of6474INof
them6475PPthem
has6476VHZhave
a6477DTa
gripe6478NNgripe
against6479INagainst
what6480WPwhat
...6481:...
the6482DTthe
way6483NNway
Apple6484NPApple
has6485VHZhave
structured6486VVNstructure
the6487DTthe
market6488NNmarket
.6489SENT.
But6490CCbut
the6491DTthe
damages6492NNSdamage
are6493VBPbe
entirely6494RBentirely
different6495JJdifferent
.6496SENT.
One6497PPone
is6498VBZbe
a6499DTa
measure6500NNmeasure
of6501INof
lost6502JJlost
profits6503NNSprofit
,6504,,
which6505WDTwhich
may6506MDmay
or6507CCor
may6508MDmay
not6509RBnot
exist6510VVexist
.6511SENT.
The6512DTthe
other6513JJother
is6514VBZbe
I6515PPI
'm6516VBPbe
paying6517VVGpay
too6518RBtoo
much6519RBmuch
.6520SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]6521LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
That6522DTthat
's6523VBZbe
correct6524JJcorrect
.6525SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]6526LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Well6527UHWell
,6528,,
but6529RBbut
,6530,,
Mister6531NPMister
...6532:...
[JUSTICE ALITO]6533LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
That6534DTthat
's6535VBZbe
an6536DTan
interesting6537JJinteresting
theory6538NNtheory
,6539,,
but6540CCbut
is6541VBZbe
that6542IN/thatthat
the6543DTthe
theory6544NNtheory
...6545:...
is6546VBZbe
that6547IN/thatthat
your6548PP$your
claim6549NNclaim
?6550SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]6551LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Yes6552NPYes
.6553SENT.
[JUSTICE ALITO]6554LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
I6555PPI
thought6556VVDthink
this6557DTthis
case6558NNcase
was6559VBDbe
all6560RBall
about6561INabout
the6562DTthe
306563CD@card@
percent6564NNpercent
.6565SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]6566LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well6567UHWell
,6568,,
the6569DTthe
other6570JJother
side6571NNside
has6572VHZhave
been6573VBNbe
trying6574VVGtry
,6575,,
Justice6576NPJustice
Alito6577NPAlito
,6578,,
to6579TOto
make6580VVmake
the6581DTthe
case6582NNcase
all6583RBall
about6584INabout
the6585DTthe
306586CD@card@
percent6587NNpercent
.6588SENT.
But6589CCbut
if6590INif
you6591PPyou
read6592VVPread
the6593DTthe
...6594:...
[JUSTICE ALITO]6595LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
So6596INso
the6597DTthe
306598CD@card@
percent6599NNpercent
has6600VHZhave
nothing6601NNnothing
to6602TOto
do6603VVdo
with6604INwith
this6605DTthis
?6606SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]6607LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
The6608NPThe
...6609:...
what6610WPwhat
the6611DTthe
percent6612NNpercent
is6613VBZbe
,6614,,
is6615VBZbe
an6616DTan
allegation6617NNallegation
that6618IN/thatthat
Apple6619NPApple
is6620VBZbe
monopolizing6621VVGmonopolize
the6622DTthe
sale6623NNsale
of6624INof
apps6625NNSapps
.6626SENT.
And6627CCand
we6628PPwe
know6629VVPknow
that6630IN/thatthat
because6631INbecause
they6632PPthey
can6633MDcan
extract6634VVextract
306635CD@card@
percent6636NNpercent
on6637INon
every6638DTevery
single6639JJsingle
sale6640NNsale
,6641,,
which6642WDTwhich
only6643RBonly
a6644DTa
monopolist6645NNmonopolist
could6646MDcould
do6647VVdo
.6648SENT.
The6649DTthe
306650CD@card@
percent6651NNpercent
is6652VBZbe
not6653RBnot
a6654DTa
measure6655NNmeasure
of6656INof
damages6657NNSdamage
.6658SENT.
I6659PPI
'm6660VBPbe
not6661RBnot
aware6662JJaware
of6663INof
any6664DTany
case6665NNcase
from6666INfrom
this6667DTthis
Court6668NPCourt
that6669WDTthat
says6670VVZsay
you6671PPyou
have6672VHhave
to6673TOto
plead6674VVplead
antitrust6675JJantitrust
damages6676NNSdamage
with6677INwith
particularity6678NNparticularity
.6679SENT.
But6680CCbut
the6681DTthe
...6682:...
because6683INbecause
of6684INof
the6685DTthe
ability6686NNability
to6687TOto
extract6688VVextract
a6689DTa
monopoly6690NNmonopoly
rent6691NNrent
,6692,,
we6693PPwe
can6694MDcan
say6695VVsay
in6696INin
good6697JJgood
faith6698NNfaith
that6699IN/thatthat
they6700PPthey
...6701:...
we6702PPwe
are6703VBPbe
paying6704VVGpay
more6705RBRmore
than6706INthan
we6707PPwe
would6708MDwould
pay6709VVpay
than6710INthan
if6711INif
a6712DTa
competitive6713JJcompetitive
market6714NNmarket
existed6715VVDexist
.6716SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]6717LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Mr6718NPMr
.6719SENT.
Frederick6720NPFrederick
,6721,,
I6722PPI
think6723VVPthink
you6724PPyou
'd6725MDwould
agree6726VVagree
that6727IN/thatthat
there6728EXthere
can6729MDcan
only6730RBonly
be6731VBbe
one6732CDone
monopoly6733NNmonopoly
rent6734NNrent
.6735SENT.
And6736CCand
then6737RBthen
the6738DTthe
question6739NNquestion
becomes6740VVZbecome
,6741,,
who6742WPwho
's6743VBZbe
paying6744VVGpay
it6745PPit
?6746SENT?
And6747CCand
it6748PPit
might6749MDmight
be6750VBbe
spread6751VVNspread
partially6752RBpartially
between6753INbetween
direct6754JJdirect
purchasers6755NNSpurchaser
and6756CCand
indirect6757JJindirect
purchasers6758NNSpurchaser
.6759SENT.
It6760PPit
might6761MDmight
be6762VBbe
partially6763RBpartially
spread6764VVNspread
between6765INbetween
the6766DTthe
app6767NPApp
makers6768NNSmaker
and6769CCand
the6770DTthe
purchasers6771NNSpurchaser
of6772INof
apps6773NNSapps
.6774SENT.
And6775CCand
disaggregating6776VVGdisaggregating
that6777DTthat
is6778VBZbe
the6779DTthe
question6780NNquestion
that6781IN/thatthat
we6782PPwe
've6783VHPhave
been6784VBNbe
wrestling6785VVGwrestle
with6786INwith
here6787RBhere
.6788SENT.
I6789PPI
guess6790VVPguess
here6791RBhere
is6792VBZbe
where6793WRBwhere
I6794PPI
'm6795VBPbe
stuck6796VVNstick
and6797CCand
need6798VVPneed
your6799PP$your
help6800NNhelp
.6801SENT.
You6802PPyou
say6803VVPsay
that6804IN/thatthat
Illinois6805NPIllinois
Brick6806NPBrick
is6807VBZbe
a6808DTa
bright-line6809NNbright-line
rule6810NNrule
premised6811VVNpremise
on6812INon
the6813DTthe
existence6814NNexistence
of6815INof
a6816DTa
contractual6817JJcontractual
relationship6818NNrelationship
between6819INbetween
the6820DTthe
buyer6821NNbuyer
...6822:...
the6823DTthe
ultimate6824JJultimate
purchaser6825NNpurchaser
and6826CCand
the6827DTthe
intermediate6828JJintermediate
seller6829NNseller
,6830,,
and6831CCand
that6832IN/thatthat
there6833EXthere
has6834VHZhave
to6835TOto
be6836VBbe
that6837DTthat
kind6838NNkind
of6839INof
relationship6840NNrelationship
,6841,,
rather6842RBrather
than6843INthan
a6844DTa
sales6845NNSsale
agency6846NNagency
relationship6847NNrelationship
like6848INlike
we6849PPwe
have6850VHPhave
here6851RBhere
.6852SENT.
But6853CCbut
antitrust6854JJantitrust
does6855NNSdoe
n't6856RBn't
usually6857RBusually
depend6858VVdepend
upon6859INupon
such6860JJsuch
contractual6861JJcontractual
formalities6862NNSformality
.6863SENT.
It6864PPit
usually6865RBusually
depends6866VVZdepend
upon6867INupon
the6868DTthe
underlying6869VVGunderlie
economics6870NNSeconomics
.6871SENT.
And6872CCand
I6873PPI
have6874VHPhave
a6875DTa
hard6876JJhard
time6877NNtime
distinguishing6878VVGdistinguish
this6879DTthis
case6880NNcase
from6881INfrom
Illinois6882NPIllinois
Brick6883NPBrick
in6884INin
the6885DTthe
sense6886NNsense
of6887INof
...6888:...
in6889INin
the6890DTthe
question6891NNquestion
of6892INof
economic6893JJeconomic
pass-through6894JJpass-through
and6895CCand
the6896DTthe
problems6897NNSproblem
that6898IN/thatthat
it6899PPit
presents6900VVZpresent
,6901,,
the6902DTthe
possibility6903NNpossibility
that6904IN/thatthat
the6905DTthe
intermediate6906JJintermediate
purchaser6907NNpurchaser
may6908MDmay
absorb6909VVabsorb
the6910DTthe
monopoly6911NNmonopoly
rent6912NNrent
and6913CCand
not6914RBnot
pass6915VVpass
it6916PPit
along6917RPalong
.6918SENT.
Now6919RBnow
that6920IN/thatthat
raises6921NNSraise
for6922INfor
me6923PPme
the6924DTthe
question6925NNquestion
,6926,,
further6927JJRfurther
question6928NNquestion
,6929,,
and6930CCand
I6931PPI
...6932:...
I6933PPI
...6934:...
I6935PPI
'll6936MDwill
wind6937VVwind
it6938PPit
up6939RPup
quickly6940RBquickly
,6941,,
I6942PPI
promise6943VVPpromise
,6944,,
whether6945INwhether
Illinois6946NPIllinois
Brick6947NPBrick
is6948VBZbe
correct6949JJcorrect
.6950SENT.
All6951DTall
right6952NNright
.6953SENT.
And6954CCand
you6955PPyou
have6956VHPhave
an6957DTan
amicus6958NNamicus
that6959WDTthat
says6960VVZsay
it6961PPit
's6962VBZbe
not6963RBnot
,6964,,
but6965CCbut
you6966PPyou
do6967VVPdo
n't6968RBn't
make6969VVmake
that6970DTthat
argument6971NNargument
.6972SENT.
I6973PPI
'm6974VBPbe
really6975RBreally
curious6976JJcurious
why6977NNwhy
...6978:...
[MR. FREDERICK]6979LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Because6980INbecause
...6981:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]6982LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
...6983:...
the6984DTthe
plaintiffs6985NNSplaintiff
'6986POS'
bar6987NNbar
is6988VBZbe
not6989RBnot
making6990VVGmake
that6991DTthat
argument6992NNargument
before6993INbefore
this6994DTthis
Court6995NPCourt
.6996SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]6997LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Because6998INbecause
...6999:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7000LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
So7001RBso
there7002RBthere
...7003:...
there7004EXthere
's7005VBZbe
a7006DTa
whole7007NNwhole
...7008:...
a7009DTa
whole7010JJwhole
bunch7011NNbunch
of7012INof
things7013NNSthing
for7014INfor
you7015PPyou
to7016TOto
chew7017VVchew
on7018RPon
.7019SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7020LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Okay7021NPOkay
.7022SENT.
I7023PPI
'll7024MDwill
try7025VVtry
to7026TOto
chew7027VVchew
on7028INon
them7029PPthem
succinctly7030RBsuccinctly
,7031,,
Your7032PP$your
Honor7033NPHonor
.7034SENT.
We7035PPwe
have7036VHPhave
n't7037RBn't
asked7038VVNask
for7039INfor
Illinois7040NPIllinois
Brick7041NPBrick
to7042TOto
be7043VBbe
overruled7044VVNoverrule
because7045INbecause
we7046PPwe
plainly7047RBplainly
meet7048VVmeet
the7049DTthe
bright-line7050NNbright-line
rule7051NNrule
.7052SENT.
We7053PPwe
paid7054VVDpay
Apple7055NPApple
and7056CCand
Apple7057NPApple
was7058VBDbe
...7059:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7060LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Say7061VVPsay
I7062PPI
do7063VVPdo
n't7064RBn't
...7065:...
say7066VVPsay
I7067PPI
do7068VVPdo
n't7069RBn't
buy7070VVbuy
the7071DTthe
formalistic7072JJformalistic
contractual7073JJcontractual
...7074:...
it7075PPit
seems7076VVZseem
to7077TOto
me7078PPme
an7079DTan
argument7080NNargument
in7081INin
...7082:...
in7083INin
...7084:...
in7085INin
the7086DTthe
law7087NNlaw
of7088INof
contracts7089NNScontract
rather7090RBrather
than7091INthan
the7092DTthe
law7093NNlaw
of7094INof
antitrust7095JJantitrust
.7096SENT.
So7097RBso
help7098VVhelp
me7099PPme
out7100RPout
with7101INwith
economics7102NNSeconomics
.7103SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7104LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Economics7105NPEconomics
,7106,,
we7107PPwe
paid7108VVDpay
money7109NNmoney
.7110SENT.
Apple7111NPApple
never7112RBnever
shared7113VVDshare
that7114DTthat
money7115NNmoney
with7116INwith
any7117DTany
middleman7118NNmiddleman
.7119SENT.
Illinois7120NPIllinois
Brick7121NPBrick
is7122VBZbe
a7123DTa
case7124NNcase
about7125INabout
a7126DTa
middleman7127NNmiddleman
.7128SENT.
There7129EXthere
's7130VBZbe
no7131DTno
middleman7132NNmiddleman
here7133RBhere
.7134SENT.
We7135PPwe
paid7136VVDpay
the7137DTthe
money7138NNmoney
.7139SENT.
Apple7140NPApple
kept7141VVDkeep
percent7142NNpercent
of7143INof
it7144PPit
...7145:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7146LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Again7147RBagain
...7148:...
again7149RBagain
,7150,,
that7151WDTthat
...7152:...
[MR. FREDERICK]7153LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
...7154:...
before7155INbefore
sending7156VVGsend
percent7157NNpercent
on7158INon
.7159SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7160LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
...7161:...
that7162WDTthat
's7163VBZbe
based7164VVNbase
on7165INon
the7166DTthe
form7167NNform
of7168INof
the7169DTthe
relationship7170NNrelationship
.7171SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7172LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
But7173CCbut
that7174DTthat
...7175:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7176LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Talk7177NNtalk
to7178TOto
me7179PPme
about7180INabout
the7181DTthe
possibility7182NNpossibility
,7183,,
the7184DTthe
problem7185NNproblem
that7186IN/thatthat
the7187DTthe
app7188NPApp
producer7189NNproducer
might7190MDmight
absorb7191VVabsorb
the7192DTthe
monopoly7193NNmonopoly
rent7194NNrent
.7195SENT.
That7196DTthat
's7197VBZbe
the7198DTthe
economic7199JJeconomic
problem7200NNproblem
that7201IN/thatthat
I7202PPI
'm7203VBPbe
stuck7204VVNstick
with7205INwith
.7206SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7207LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Okay7208NPOkay
.7209SENT.
If7210INif
I7211PPI
could7212MDcould
try7213VVtry
to7214TOto
answer7215VVanswer
your7216PP$your
question7217NNquestion
with7218INwith
a7219DTa
hypothetical7220JJhypothetical
,7221,,
and7222CCand
if7223INif
the7224DTthe
Court7225NPCourt
would7226MDwould
indulge7227VVindulge
me7228PPme
,7229,,
suppose7230VVPsuppose
in7231INin
a7232DTa
competitive7233JJcompetitive
market7234NNmarket
the7235DTthe
price7236NNprice
for7237INfor
an7238DTan
app7239NPApp
was7240VBDbe
907241CD@card@
cents7242NNScent
,7243,,
not7244RBnot
997245CD@card@
cents7246NNScent
,7247,,
as7248INas
Apple7249NPApple
is7250VBZbe
charging7251VVGcharge
.7252SENT.
It7253PPit
's7254VBZbe
907255CD@card@
cents7256NNScent
.7257SENT.
We7258PPwe
would7259MDwould
all7260RBall
agree7261VVagree
,7262,,
I7263PPI
think7264VVPthink
,7265,,
that7266IN/thatthat
the7267DTthe
consumer7268NNconsumer
can7269MDcan
sue7270VVsue
for7271INfor
the7272DTthe
nine7273CDnine
cent7274NNcent
differential7275NNdifferential
between7276INbetween
the7277DTthe
monopoly7278NNmonopoly
price7279NNprice
...7280:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7281LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
I7282PPI
understand7283VVPunderstand
the7284DTthe
997285CD@card@
cent7286NNcent
argument7287NNargument
.7288SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7289LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Okay7290NPOkay
.7291SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7292LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Let7293NPLet
's7294POS's
put7295NNput
that7296IN/thatthat
aside7297RBaside
.7298SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7299LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
All7300DTall
right7301NNright
.7302SENT.
Now7303RBnow
that7304IN/thatthat
we7305PPwe
've7306VHPhave
got7307VVNget
that7308IN/thatthat
aside7309RBaside
,7310,,
let7311VVPlet
's7312POS's
look7313NNlook
at7314INat
it7315PPit
from7316INfrom
the7317DTthe
developer7318NNdeveloper
's7319POS's
perspective7320NNperspective
.7321SENT.
If7322INif
they7323PPthey
had7324VHDhave
a7325DTa
claim7326NNclaim
...7327:...
if7328INif
they7329PPthey
had7330VHDhave
a7331DTa
claim7332NNclaim
...7333:...
and7334CCand
I7335PPI
'm7336VBPbe
not7337RBnot
saying7338VVGsay
that7339IN/thatthat
they7340PPthey
do7341VVPdo
...7342:...
but7343CCbut
if7344INif
they7345PPthey
had7346VHDhave
a7347DTa
claim7348NNclaim
,7349,,
they7350PPthey
would7351MDwould
need7352VVneed
to7353TOto
show7354VVshow
the7355DTthe
difference7356NNdifference
between7357INbetween
the7358DTthe
profits7359NNSprofit
that7360IN/thatthat
they7361PPthey
would7362MDwould
have7363VHhave
achieved7364VVNachieve
in7365INin
the7366DTthe
monopoly7367NNmonopoly
App7368NPApp
Store7369NPStore
versus7370CCversus
the7371DTthe
profits7372NNSprofit
they7373PPthey
would7374MDwould
have7375VHhave
achieved7376VVNachieve
at7377INat
a7378DTa
competitive7379JJcompetitive
market7380NNmarket
price7381NNprice
.7382SENT.
That7383DTthat
depends7384VVZdepend
on7385INon
three7386CDthree
factors7387NNSfactor
,7388,,
okay7389JJokay
?7390SENT?
One7391PPone
is7392VBZbe
the7393DTthe
difference7394NNdifference
in7395INin
sales7396NNSsale
that7397IN/thatthat
they7398PPthey
would7399MDwould
achieve7400VVachieve
between7401INbetween
997402CD@card@
cents7403NNScent
and7404CCand
997405CD@card@
...7406:...
907407CD@card@
cents7408NNScent
.7409SENT.
The7410DTthe
second7411NNsecond
is7412VBZbe
how7413WRBhow
their7414PP$their
sales7415NNSsale
differences7416NNSdifference
would7417MDwould
affect7418VVaffect
their7419PP$their
revenue7420NNrevenue
.7421SENT.
And7422CCand
the7423DTthe
third7424NNthird
is7425VBZbe
whether7426INwhether
the7427DTthe
commission7428NNcommission
was7429VBDbe
307430CD@card@
percent7431NNpercent
in7432INin
a7433DTa
competitive7434JJcompetitive
market7435NNmarket
.7436SENT.
Okay7437JJokay
?7438SENT?
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]7439LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Uh-huh7440NPUh-huh
.7441SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7442LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
So7443RBso
,7444,,
if7445INif
you7446PPyou
take7447VVPtake
my7448PP$my
hypothetical7449JJhypothetical
,7450,,
the7451DTthe
damages7452NNSdamage
for7453INfor
the7454DTthe
developer7455NNdeveloper
,7456,,
there7457EXthere
are7458VBPbe
three7459CDthree
possibilities7460NNSpossibility
.7461SENT.
One7462CDOne
is7463VBZbe
that7464IN/thatthat
it7465PPit
's7466VBZbe
zero7467CDzero
.7468SENT.
If7469INif
the7470DTthe
commission7471NNcommission
went7472VVDgo
to7473TOto
percent7474NNpercent
in7475INin
a7476DTa
competitive7477JJcompetitive
market7478NNmarket
,7479,,
the7480DTthe
developer7481NNdeveloper
takes7482VVZtake
home7483RBhome
707484CD@card@
cents7485NNScent
just7486RBjust
as7487INas
it7488PPit
does7489VVZdo
with7490INwith
Apple7491NPApple
's7492POS's
307493CD@card@
percent7494NNpercent
in7495INin
a7496DTa
997497CD@card@
cent7498NNcent
monopoly7499NNmonopoly
market7500NNmarket
.7501SENT.
At7502INat
227503CD@card@
percent7504NNpercent
commission7505NNcommission
,7506,,
the7507DTthe
developer7508NNdeveloper
has7509VHZhave
zero7510CDzero
damages7511NNSdamage
.7512SENT.
It7513PPit
...7514:...
it7515PPit
...7516:...
the7517DTthe
developer7518NNdeveloper
would7519MDwould
have7520VHhave
positive7521JJpositive
damages7522NNSdamage
if7523INif
the7524DTthe
commission7525NNcommission
were7526VBDbe
zero7527CDzero
because7528INbecause
then7529RBthen
the7530DTthe
app7531NPApp
developer7532NNdeveloper
sustains7533VVZsustain
damages7534NNSdamage
of7535INof
207536CD@card@
cents7537NNScent
.7538SENT.
The7539DTthe
developer7540NNdeveloper
would7541MDwould
make7542VVmake
the7543DTthe
907544CD@card@
cents7545NNScent
in7546INin
the7547DTthe
competitive7548JJcompetitive
market7549NNmarket
instead7550RBinstead
of7551INof
the7552DTthe
cents7553NNScent
that7554IN/thatthat
Apple7555NPApple
is7556VBZbe
now7557RBnow
passing7558VVGpass
along7559RPalong
by7560INby
virtue7561NNvirtue
of7562INof
the7563DTthe
monopoly7564NNmonopoly
market7565NNmarket
.7566SENT.
The7567DTthe
damages7568NNSdamage
would7569MDwould
be7570VBbe
negative7571JJnegative
,7572,,
though7573RBthough
,7574,,
if7575INif
,7576,,
in7577INin
a7578DTa
competitive7579JJcompetitive
market7580NNmarket
,7581,,
the7582DTthe
commission7583NNcommission
stayed7584VVDstay
at7585INat
307586CD@card@
percent7587NNpercent
because7588INbecause
,7589,,
there7590RBthere
,7591,,
the7592DTthe
benefits7593NNSbenefit
that7594WDTthat
would7595MDwould
achieve7596VVachieve
by7597INby
the7598DTthe
monopoly7599NNmonopoly
...7600:...
price7601NNprice
of7602INof
997603CD@card@
cents7604NNScent
give7605VVPgive
the7606DTthe
developer7607NNdeveloper
an7608DTan
extra7609JJextra
eight7610CDeight
cents7611NNScent
per7612INper
transaction7613NNtransaction
.7614SENT.
So7615RBso
,7616,,
in7617INin
that7618DTthat
way7619NNway
,7620,,
Mr7621NPMr
.7622SENT.
Chief7623NPChief
Justice7624NPJustice
,7625,,
the7626DTthe
developer7627NNdeveloper
has7628VHZhave
a7629DTa
different7630JJdifferent
claim7631NNclaim
that7632WDTthat
's7633VBZbe
based7634VVNbase
on7635INon
its7636PP$its
lost7637JJlost
profits7638NNSprofit
.7639SENT.
And7640CCand
that7641WDTthat
would7642MDwould
be7643VBbe
irrespective7644RBirrespective
of7645INof
whether7646INwhether
the7647DTthe
buyer7648NNbuyer
of7649INof
the7650DTthe
app7651NPApp
,7652,,
the7653DTthe
consumer7654NNconsumer
,7655,,
sustains7656VVZsustain
damage7657NNdamage
for7658INfor
the7659DTthe
nine7660CDnine
cents7661NNScent
in7662INin
my7663PP$my
hypothetical7664JJhypothetical
.7665SENT.
You7666PPyou
can7667MDcan
run7668VVrun
these7669DTthese
out7670RPout
under7671INunder
different7672JJdifferent
...7673:...
you7674PPyou
can7675MDcan
get7676VVget
your7677PP$your
law7678NNlaw
clerks7679NNSclerk
to7680TOto
run7681VVrun
all7682PDTall
the7683DTthe
different7684JJdifferent
scenarios7685NNSscenario
.7686SENT.
It7687PPit
always7688RBalways
works7689VVZwork
the7690DTthe
same7691JJsame
way7692NNway
.7693SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]7694LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
Unless7695INunless
we're7696NNwe're
...7697:...
unless7698INunless
we7699PPwe
're7700VBPbe
prepared7701VVNprepare
to7702TOto
overrule7703VVoverrule
,7704,,
which7705WDTwhich
was7706VBDbe
n't7707RBn't
our7708PP$our
case7709NNcase
,7710,,
Alcoa7711NPAlcoa
,7712,,
I7713PPI
think7714VVPthink
all7715RBall
you7716PPyou
'd7717MDwould
have7718VHhave
to7719TOto
show7720VVshow
is7721VBZbe
,7722,,
one7723CDone
,7724,,
they7725PPthey
have7726VHPhave
monopoly7727NNmonopoly
power7728NNpower
,7729,,
and7730CCand
,7731,,
two7732CDtwo
,7733,,
they7734PPthey
achieved7735VVDachieve
it7736PPit
through7737INthrough
less7738RBRless
restrictive7739JJrestrictive
...7740:...
for7741INfor
more7742RBRmore
restrictive7743JJrestrictive
than7744INthan
necessary7745JJnecessary
practices7746NNSpractice
,7747,,
end7748NNend
of7749INof
your7750PP$your
burden7751NNburden
.7752SENT.
In7753INin
your7754PP$your
case7755NNcase
...7756:...
and7757CCand
...7758:...
and7759CCand
Justice7760NPJustice
Gorsuch7761NPGorsuch
is7762VBZbe
quite7763RBquite
right7764RBright
,7765,,
there7766EXthere
's7767VBZbe
only7768RBonly
one7769CDone
monopoly7770NNmonopoly
profit7771NNprofit
to7772TOto
be7773VBbe
earned7774VVNearn
.7775SENT.
And7776CCand
so7777RBso
you7778PPyou
'd7779MDwould
have7780VHhave
a7781DTa
different7782JJdifferent
question7783NNquestion
when7784WRBwhen
you7785PPyou
get7786VVPget
to7787TOto
the7788DTthe
damages7789NNSdamage
stage7790NNstage
.7791SENT.
The7792DTthe
different7793JJdifferent
question7794NNquestion
is7795VBZbe
:7796::
Well7797UHWell
,7798,,
how7799WRBhow
did7800VVDdo
they7801PPthey
divide7802VVPdivide
that7803IN/thatthat
monopoly7804NNmonopoly
profit7805NNprofit
?7806SENT?
You7807PPyou
'd7808MDwould
like7809VVlike
to7810TOto
show7811VVshow
that7812IN/thatthat
they7813PPthey
got7814VVDget
some7815DTsome
of7816INof
it7817PPit
from7818INfrom
consumers7819NNSconsumer
.7820SENT.
But7821CCbut
that7822DTthat
's7823VBZbe
for7824INfor
a7825DTa
later7826JJRlate
proceeding7827NNproceeding
.7828SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]7829LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
That7830DTthat
's7831VBZbe
correct7832JJcorrect
.7833SENT.
[JUSTICE BREYER]7834LOC[JUSTICE BREYER]
And7835CCand
you7836PPyou
're7837VBPbe
adding7838VVGadd
one7839CDone
thing7840NNthing
.7841SENT.
One7842CDOne
of7843INof
the7844DTthe
things7845NNSthing
that7846WDTthat
we7847PPwe
want7848VVPwant
to7849TOto
use7850VVuse
in7851INin
order7852NNorder
to7853TOto
prove7854VVprove
that7855IN/thatthat
they7856PPthey
do7857VVPdo
have7858VHhave
monopoly7859NNmonopoly
power7860NNpower
,7861,,
i7862NPi
.7863SENT.
e7864LSe
.7865SENT.
,7866,,
the7867DTthe
power7868NNpower
to7869TOto
raise7870VVraise
price7871NNprice
significantly7872RBsignificantly
above7873INabove
a7874DTa
competitive7875JJcompetitive
level7876NNlevel
,7877,,
is7878VBZbe
they7879PPthey
charge7880VVPcharge
us7881PPus
so7882RBso
...7883:...
bloody7884JJbloody
...7885:...
much7886JJmuch
money7887NNmoney
.7888SENT.
That7889DTthat
's7890VBZbe
just7891RBjust
a7892DTa
piece7893NNpiece
of7894INof
evidence7895NNevidence
here7896RBhere
,7897,,
and7898CCand
we7899PPwe
'll7900MDwill
worry7901VVworry
later7902RBRlater
,7903,,
agreeing7904VVGagree
that7905IN/thatthat
there7906EXthere
's7907VBZbe
only7908RBonly
one7909CDone
monopoly7910NNmonopoly
profit7911NNprofit
in7912INin
theory7913NNtheory
,7914,,
as7915INas
to7916TOto
who7917WPwho
got7918VVDget
what7919WPwhat
.7920SENT.
Now7921RBnow
have7922VHPhave
I7923PPI
stated7924VVDstate
that7925IN/thatthat
correctly7926RBcorrectly
?7927SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]7928LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Yes7929NPYes
,7930,,
you7931PPyou
have7932VHPhave
,7933,,
Justice7934NPJustice
Breyer7935NPBreyer
.7936SENT.
I7937PPI
mean7938VVPmean
,7939,,
the7940DTthe
basic7941JJbasic
problem7942NNproblem
in7943INin
this7944DTthis
case7945NNcase
as7946INas
it7947PPit
comes7948VVZcome
to7949TOto
this7950DTthis
Court7951NNcourt
is7952VBZbe
who7953WPwho
gets7954VVZget
to7955TOto
complain7956VVcomplain
about7957INabout
the7958DTthe
monopoly7959NNmonopoly
App7960NPApp
Store7961NPStore
.7962SENT.
We7963PPwe
say7964VVPsay
,7965,,
as7966INas
the7967DTthe
buyers7968NNSbuyer
of7969INof
the7970DTthe
apps7971NNSapps
from7972INfrom
the7973DTthe
monopoly7974NNmonopoly
App7975NPApp
Store7976NPStore
,7977,,
there7978EXthere
's7979VBZbe
no7980DTno
form7981NNform
or7982CCor
function7983NNfunction
,7984,,
there7985EXthere
are7986VBPbe
no7987DTno
contract7988NNcontract
issues7989NNSissue
,7990,,
Justice7991NPJustice
Gorsuch7992NPGorsuch
,7993,,
that7994WDTthat
create7995VVPcreate
a7996DTa
different7997JJdifferent
form7998NNform
versus7999CCversus
function8000NNfunction
problem8001NNproblem
.8002SENT.
We8003PPwe
're8004VBPbe
paying8005VVGpay
the8006DTthe
money8007NNmoney
.8008SENT.
They8009PPthey
're8010VBPbe
keeping8011VVGkeep
it8012PPit
.8013SENT.
And8014CCand
we8015PPwe
think8016VVPthink
we8017PPwe
're8018VBPbe
paying8019VVGpay
more8020RBRmore
than8021INthan
we're8022NNwe're
...8023:...
we8024PPwe
would8025MDwould
have8026VHhave
to8027TOto
if8028INif
the8029DTthe
market8030NNmarket
was8031VBDbe
a8032DTa
competitive8033JJcompetitive
market8034NNmarket
.8035SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]8036LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
They8037PPthey
say8038VVPsay
it8039PPit
would8040MDwould
be8041VBbe
different8042JJdifferent
if8043INif
Apple8044NPApple
purchased8045VVDpurchase
the8046DTthe
apps8047NNSapps
from8048INfrom
the8049DTthe
app8050NPApp
developer8051NNdeveloper
and8052CCand
then8053RBthen
added8054VVDadd
308055CD@card@
percent8056NNpercent
on8057INon
the8058DTthe
sale8059NNsale
.8060SENT.
And8061CCand
why8062WRBwhy
is8063VBZbe
that8064IN/thatthat
not8065RBnot
different8066JJdifferent
?8067SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]8068LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Because8069INbecause
it8070PPit
's8071VBZbe
irrelevant8072JJirrelevant
.8073SENT.
And8074CCand
here8075RBhere
's8076VBZbe
where8077WRBwhere
we8078PPwe
part8079VVPpart
company8080NNcompany
from8081INfrom
the8082DTthe
Solicitor8083NPSolicitor
General8084NPGeneral
.8085SENT.
It8086PPit
's8087VBZbe
irrelevant8088JJirrelevant
who8089WPwho
sets8090VVZset
the8091DTthe
price8092NNprice
so8093RBso
long8094RBlong
as8095INas
what8096WPwhat
the8097DTthe
violation8098NNviolation
is8099VBZbe
here8100RBhere
,8101,,
the8102DTthe
monopoly8103NNmonopoly
App8104NPApp
Store8105NPStore
leads8106VVZlead
to8107TOto
higher8108JJRhigh
prices8109NNSprice
that8110IN/thatthat
the8111DTthe
consumers8112NNSconsumer
have8113VHPhave
to8114TOto
pay8115VVpay
.8116SENT.
That8117DTthat
's8118VBZbe
what8119WPwhat
the8120DTthe
violation8121NNviolation
is8122VBZbe
.8123SENT.
That8124DTthat
's8125VBZbe
how8126WRBhow
we8127PPwe
are8128VBPbe
proximately8129RBproximately
harmed8130VVNharm
.8131SENT.
So8132RBso
,8133,,
in8134INin
the8135DTthe
very8136RBvery
hypothetical8137JJhypothetical
,8138,,
Justice8139NPJustice
Kavanaugh8140NPKavanaugh
,8141,,
that8142WDTthat
you8143PPyou
posed8144VVDpose
to8145TOto
the8146DTthe
Solicitor8147NPSolicitor
General8148NPGeneral
,8149,,
the8150DTthe
Solicitor8151NPSolicitor
General8152NPGeneral
concedes8153VVZconcede
we8154PPwe
are8155VBPbe
direct8156JJdirect
purchasers8157NNSpurchaser
in8158INin
a8159DTa
situation8160NNsituation
where8161WRBwhere
the8162DTthe
app8163NPApp
developer8164NNdeveloper
sets8165VVZset
the8166DTthe
price8167NNprice
and8168CCand
they8169PPthey
simply8170RBsimply
tack8171VVPtack
on8172INon
308173CD@card@
percent8174NNpercent
by8175INby
virtue8176NNvirtue
of8177INof
their8178PP$their
monopoly8179NNmonopoly
power8180NNpower
.8181SENT.
It8182PPit
's8183VBZbe
no8184RBno
different8185JJdifferent
here8186RBhere
.8187SENT.
If8188INif
you8189PPyou
think8190VVPthink
about8191INabout
it8192PPit
in8193INin
...8194:...
in8195INin
terms8196NNSterm
of8197INof
what8198WPwhat
is8199VBZbe
actually8200RBactually
going8201VVGgo
on8202INon
,8203,,
suppose8204VVPsuppose
Apple8205NPApple
dropped8206VVDdrop
its8207PP$its
commission8208NNcommission
from8209INfrom
308210CD@card@
percent8211NNpercent
to8212TOto
208213CD@card@
percent8214NNpercent
,8215,,
but8216CCbut
it8217PPit
maintained8218VVDmaintain
the8219DTthe
price8220NNprice
restriction8221NNrestriction
of8222INof
a8223DTa
998224CD@card@
cent8225NNcent
app8226NNapp
.8227SENT.
From8228INfrom
the8229DTthe
consumer8230NNconsumer
's8231POS's
perspective8232NNperspective
,8233,,
we8234PPwe
're8235VBPbe
still8236RBstill
overpaying8237VVGoverpay
for8238INfor
the8239DTthe
app8240NPApp
.8241SENT.
Under8242INunder
that8243DTthat
hypothetical8244JJhypothetical
,8245,,
Apple8246NPApple
simply8247RBsimply
gives8248VVZgive
the8249DTthe
app8250NPApp
developer8251NNdeveloper
more8252JJRmore
money8253NNmoney
,8254,,
but8255CCbut
that8256WDTthat
does8257VVZdo
n't8258RBn't
affect8259VVaffect
the8260DTthe
consumer8261NNconsumer
welfare8262NNwelfare
at8263INat
all8264DTall
.8265SENT.
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]8266LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
Now8267RBnow
...8268:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]8269LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Are8270VBPbe
we8271PPwe
going8272VVGgo
to8273TOto
create8274VVcreate
a8275DTa
...8276:...
I8277PPI
'm8278VBPbe
sorry8279JJsorry
.8280SENT.
Go8281VVgo
ahead8282RBahead
,8283,,
please8284UHplease
.8285SENT.
[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]8286LOC[JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR]
The8287NPThe
General8288NPGeneral
said8289VVDsay
that8290IN/thatthat
if8291INif
,8292,,
in8293INin
fact8294NNfact
,8295,,
Apple8296NPApple
bought8297VVDbuy
these8298DTthese
products8299NNSproduct
from8300INfrom
suppliers8301NNSsupplier
and8302CCand
paid8303VVDpay
them8304PPthem
and8305CCand
then8306RBthen
added8307VVDadd
percent8308NNpercent
to8309TOto
you8310PPyou
,8311,,
that8312IN/thatthat
that8313WDTthat
would8314MDwould
be8315VBbe
a8316DTa
classic8317JJclassic
antitrust8318JJantitrust
violation8319NNviolation
.8320SENT.
You8321PPyou
're8322VBPbe
saying8323VVGsay
...8324:...
that8325WDTthat
's8326VBZbe
basically8327RBbasically
what8328WPwhat
they8329PPthey
're8330VBPbe
doing8331VVGdo
here8332RBhere
anyway8333RBanyway
.8334SENT.
But8335CCbut
let8336VVlet
's8337VBZbe
take8338VVtake
the8339DTthe
reverse8340NNreverse
.8341SENT.
Let8342VVlet
's8343VBZbe
say8344VVsay
they8345PPthey
collected8346VVNcollect
money8347NNmoney
from8348INfrom
you8349PPyou
and8350CCand
paid8351VVDpay
all8352RBall
of8353INof
it8354PPit
over8355INover
to8356TOto
the8357DTthe
developer8358NNdeveloper
and8359CCand
then8360RBthen
told8361VVDtell
the8362DTthe
developer8363NNdeveloper
:8364::
Give8365VVgive
us8366PPus
percent8367NNpercent
of8368INof
that8369DTthat
back8370NNback
.8371SENT.
Would8372MDwould
you8373PPyou
then8374RBthen
still8375RBstill
be8376VBbe
a8377DTa
direct8378JJdirect
purchaser8379NNpurchaser
and8380CCand
...8381:...
[MR. FREDERICK]8382LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
So8383INso
we8384PPwe
would8385MDwould
still8386RBstill
be8387VBbe
direct8388JJdirect
purchasers8389NNSpurchaser
if8390INif
,8391,,
under8392INunder
your8393PP$your
hypothetical8394JJhypothetical
,8395,,
we8396PPwe
're8397VBPbe
buying8398VVGbuy
it8399PPit
from8400INfrom
Apple8401NPApple
and8402CCand
then8403RBthen
Apple8404NPApple
is8405VBZbe
engaging8406VVGengage
in8407INin
the8408DTthe
Justice8409NPJustice
Gorsuch8410NPGorsuch
form8411NNform
over8412INover
function8413NNfunction
situations8414NNSsituation
in8415INin
terms8416NNSterm
of8417INof
how8418WRBhow
the8419DTthe
money8420NNmoney
gets8421VVZget
moved8422VVNmove
around8423RParound
.8424SENT.
I8425PPI
think8426VVPthink
that8427IN/thatthat
the8428DTthe
...8429:...
in8430INin
that8431DTthat
situation8432NNsituation
,8433,,
we8434PPwe
are8435VBPbe
still8436RBstill
directly8437RBdirectly
purchasing8438VVGpurchase
and8439CCand
we8440PPwe
're8441VBPbe
still8442RBstill
able8443JJable
to8444TOto
complain8445VVcomplain
about8446INabout
Apple8447NPApple
's8448POS's
violation8449NNviolation
.8450SENT.
And8451CCand
I8452PPI
think8453VVPthink
,8454,,
under8455INunder
your8456PP$your
hypothetical8457JJhypothetical
,8458,,
Justice8459NPJustice
Sotomayor8460NPSotomayor
,8461,,
we8462PPwe
have8463VHPhave
to8464TOto
keep8465VVkeep
the8466DTthe
idea8467NNidea
that8468IN/thatthat
Apple8469NPApple
is8470VBZbe
still8471RBstill
operating8472VVGoperate
a8473DTa
monopoly8474NNmonopoly
App8475NPApp
Store8476NPStore
.8477SENT.
It8478PPit
's8479VBZbe
no8480RBno
different8481JJdifferent
than8482INthan
if8483INif
there8484EXthere
was8485VBDbe
a8486DTa
grocery8487NNgrocery
store8488NNstore
chain8489NNchain
that8490WDTthat
monopolized8491VVDmonopolize
the8492DTthe
sale8493NNsale
of8494INof
all8495DTall
vegetables8496NNSvegetable
.8497SENT.
If8498INif
they8499PPthey
...8500:...
if8501INif
that8502WDTthat
is8503VBZbe
the8504DTthe
only8505JJonly
place8506NNplace
you8507PPyou
could8508MDcould
buy8509VVbuy
vegetables8510NNSvegetable
,8511,,
we8512PPwe
would8513MDwould
say8514VVsay
that8515IN/thatthat
that8516DTthat
monopoly8517NNmonopoly
store8518NNstore
outlet8519NNoutlet
was8520VBDbe
able8521JJable
to8522TOto
control8523VVcontrol
prices8524NNSprice
and8525CCand
affect8526VVaffect
output8527NNoutput
.8528SENT.
That's8529NNSThat's
...8530:...
the8531DTthe
...8532:...
basically8533RBbasically
what8534WPwhat
's8535VBZbe
happening8536VVGhappen
here8537RBhere
.8538SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]8539LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Well8540UHwell
,8541,,
I8542PPI
think8543VVPthink
Justice8544NPJustice
Sotomayor8545NPSotomayor
's8546POS's
question8547NNquestion
is8548VBZbe
a8549DTa
...8550:...
requires8551VVZrequire
further8552JJRfurther
exploration8553NNexploration
.8554SENT.
I8555PPI
mean8556VVPmean
,8557,,
are8558VBPbe
...8559:...
are8560VBPbe
we8561PPwe
in8562INin
danger8563NNdanger
of8564INof
just8565RBjust
incentivizing8566VVGincentivizing
a8567DTa
restructuring8568NNrestructuring
of8569INof
contracts8570NNScontract
here8571RBhere
so8572RBso
that8573IN/thatthat
all8574PDTall
that8575DTthat
Apple8576NPApple
does8577VVZdo
or8578CCor
people8579NNSpeople
like8580VVPlike
it8581PPit
is8582VBZbe
make8583VVmake
you8584PPyou
purchase8585VVpurchase
directly8586RBdirectly
from8587INfrom
the8588DTthe
app8589NPApp
provider8590NNprovider
and8591CCand
then8592RBthen
it8593PPit
then8594RBthen
returns8595VVZreturn
the8596DTthe
...8597:...
the8598DTthe
profit8599NNprofit
to8600TOto
...8601:...
to8602TOto
Apple8603NPApple
later8604RBRlater
?8605SENT?
And8606CCand
if8607INif
that8608WDTthat
's8609VBZbe
all8610DTall
we8611PPwe
're8612VBPbe
doing8613VVGdo
,8614,,
then8615RBthen
what8616WPwhat
is8617VBZbe
the8618DTthe
point8619NNpoint
of8620INof
Illinois8621NPIllinois
Brick8622NPBrick
?8623SENT?
And8624CCand
you8625PPyou
still8626RBstill
have8627VHPhave
n't8628RBn't
explained8629VVNexplain
to8630TOto
me8631PPme
why8632WRBwhy
the8633DTthe
plaintiffs8634NNSplaintiff
'8635POS'
bar8636NNbar
is8637VBZbe
n't8638RBn't
asking8639VVGask
to8640TOto
overturn8641VVoverturn
Illinois8642NPIllinois
Brick8643NPBrick
when8644WRBwhen
318645CD@card@
states8646NNSstate
are8647VBPbe
.8648SENT.
So8649RBso
help8650VVhelp
...8651:...
help8652VVhelp
me8653PPme
on8654INon
both8655CCboth
those8656DTthose
.8657SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]8658LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well8659UHwell
...8660:...
well8661RBwell
...8662:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]8663LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
They8664PPthey
're8665VBPbe
two8666CDtwo
separate8667JJseparate
questions8668NNSquestion
.8669SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]8670LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
...8671:...
okay8672JJokay
.8673SENT.
So8674RBso
...8675:...
so8676RBso
let8677VVlet
me8678PPme
take8679VVtake
the8680DTthe
second8681JJsecond
one8682CDone
first8683RBfirst
,8684,,
Justice8685NPJustice
Gorsuch8686NPGorsuch
.8687SENT.
I8688PPI
do8689VVPdo
n't8690RBn't
represent8691VVrepresent
the8692DTthe
plaintiffs8693NNSplaintiff
'8694POS'
bar8695NNbar
.8696SENT.
I8697PPI
represent8698VVPrepresent
the8699DTthe
consumers8700NNSconsumer
in8701INin
this8702DTthis
case8703NNcase
,8704,,
and8705CCand
the8706DTthe
consumers8707NNSconsumer
in8708INin
this8709DTthis
case8710NNcase
have8711VHhave
no8712DTno
brief8713NNbrief
and8714CCand
no8715DTno
beef8716NNbeef
with8717INwith
Illinois8718NPIllinois
Brick8719NPBrick
.8720SENT.
We8721PPwe
think8722VVPthink
we8723PPwe
are8724VBPbe
direct8725JJdirect
purchasers8726NNSpurchaser
.8727SENT.
We8728PPwe
satisfy8729VVPsatisfy
the8730DTthe
rule8731NNrule
.8732SENT.
We8733PPwe
come8734VVPcome
within8735INwithin
the8736DTthe
bright8737JJbright
line8738NNline
.8739SENT.
That8740DTthat
's8741VBZbe
okay8742JJokay
with8743INwith
us8744PPus
.8745SENT.
What8746WPWhat
the8747DTthe
Court8748NPCourt
decides8749VVZdecide
doctrinally8750RBdoctrinally
to8751TOto
do8752VVdo
with8753INwith
Illinois8754NPIllinois
Brick8755NPBrick
is8756VBZbe
obviously8757RBobviously
something8758NNsomething
where8759WRBwhere
I8760PPI
think8761VVPthink
you8762PPyou
go8763VVgo
to8764TOto
a8765DTa
different8766JJdifferent
situation8767NNsituation
if8768INif
the8769DTthe
case8770NNcase
arises8771VVZarise
.8772SENT.
But8773CCbut
,8774,,
on8775INon
your8776PP$your
other8777JJother
point8778NNpoint
,8779,,
I8780PPI
think8781VVPthink
it8782PPit
's8783VBZbe
the8784DTthe
other8785JJother
side8786NNside
that8787WDTthat
is8788VBZbe
actually8789RBactually
asking8790VVGask
for8791INfor
the8792DTthe
opportunity8793NNopportunity
to8794TOto
use8795VVuse
contracts8796NNScontract
in8797INin
order8798NNorder
to8799TOto
distort8800VVdistort
or8801CCor
recharacterize8802VVrecharacterize
matters8803NNSmatter
in8804INin
a8805DTa
way8806NNway
that8807WDTthat
evades8808VVZevade
the8809DTthe
Illinois8810NPIllinois
Brick8811NPBrick
bright-line8812NNbright-line
rule8813NNrule
.8814SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]8815LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Well8816UHwell
...8817:...
well8818UHwell
,8819,,
assume8820VVassume
for8821INfor
the8822DTthe
moment8823NNmoment
that8824WDTthat
...8825:...
that8826IN/thatthat
I8827PPI
believe8828VVPbelieve
the8829DTthe
economics8830NNSeconomics
underlying8831VVGunderlie
the8832DTthe
two8833CDtwo
arrangements8834NNSarrangement
are8835VBPbe
very8836RBvery
similar8837JJsimilar
.8838SENT.
Hard8839JJhard
to8840TOto
distinguish8841VVdistinguish
.8842SENT.
I8843PPI
have8844VHPhave
n't8845RBn't
yet8846RByet
heard8847VVNhear
you8848PPyou
give8849VVPgive
me8850PPme
a8851DTa
good8852JJgood
argument8853NNargument
why8854WRBwhy
.8855SENT.
So8856RBso
let8857VVlet
's8858VBZbe
just8859RBjust
posit8860NNposit
that8861RBthat
.8862SENT.
Then8863RBthen
it8864PPit
really8865RBreally
is8866VBZbe
just8867RBjust
about8868INabout
form8869NNform
,8870,,
is8871VBZbe
n't8872RBn't
it8873PPit
?8874SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]8875LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
No8876NPNo
,8877,,
I8878PPI
think8879VVPthink
in8880INin
that8881DTthat
hypothetical8882JJhypothetical
,8883,,
I8884PPI
would8885MDwould
be8886VBbe
prepared8887VVNprepare
to8888TOto
say8889VVsay
if8890INif
we8891PPwe
were8892VBDbe
paying8893VVGpay
the8894DTthe
developer8895NNdeveloper
directly8896RBdirectly
for8897INfor
the8898DTthe
app8899NPApp
and8900CCand
the8901DTthe
app8902NPApp
developer8903NNdeveloper
could8904MDcould
set8905VVset
whatever8906WDTwhatever
price8907NNprice
it8908PPit
wanted8909VVDwant
to8910TOto
set8911VVset
,8912,,
okay8913RBokay
,8914,,
keep8915VVkeep
with8916INwith
me8917PPme
on8918INon
that8919DTthat
assumption8920NNassumption
,8921,,
the8922DTthe
app8923NPApp
developer8924NNdeveloper
operating8925VVGoperate
in8926INin
a8927DTa
free8928JJfree
market8929NNmarket
can8930MDcan
set8931VVset
whatever8932WDTwhatever
it8933PPit
wants8934VVZwant
to8935TOto
set8936VVset
,8937,,
and8938CCand
then8939RBthen
Apple8940NPApple
comes8941VVZcome
after8942INafter
the8943DTthe
app8944NPApp
developer8945NNdeveloper
and8946CCand
says8947VVZsay
,8948,,
hey8949UHhey
,8950,,
you8951PPyou
bought8952VVDbuy
it8953PPit
...8954:...
the8955DTthe
consumer8956NNconsumer
bought8957VVDbuy
it8958PPit
through8959INthrough
our8960PP$our
store8961NNstore
,8962,,
we8963PPwe
want8964VVPwant
whatever8965WDTwhatever
we8966PPwe
want8967VVPwant
,8968,,
that8969WDTthat
becomes8970VVZbecome
not8971RBnot
a8972DTa
problem8973NNproblem
with8974INwith
the8975DTthe
consumer8976NNconsumer
;8977:;
that8978WDTthat
becomes8979VVZbecome
a8980DTa
problem8981NNproblem
between8982INbetween
the8983DTthe
developer8984NNdeveloper
and8985CCand
the8986DTthe
app8987NPApp
...8988:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]8989LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Ah8990UHah
...8991:...
[MR. FREDERICK]8992LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
...8993:...
and8994CCand
the8995DTthe
seller8996NNseller
of8997INof
the8998DTthe
app8999NPApp
.9000SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]9001LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
...9002:...
so9003RBso
pricing9004NNpricing
control9005NNcontrol
is9006VBZbe
really9007RBreally
important9008JJimportant
to9009TOto
proximate9010JJproximate
cause9011NNcause
then9012RBthen
?9013SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]9014LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
I9015PPI
beg9016VVPbeg
your9017PP$your
pardon9018NNpardon
?9019SENT?
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]9020LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
So9021INso
pricing9022NNpricing
control9023NNcontrol
is9024VBZbe
really9025RBreally
important9026JJimportant
to9027TOto
proximate9028JJproximate
cause9029NNcause
?9030SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]9031LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
No9032NPNo
,9033,,
pricing9034NNpricing
control9035NNcontrol
is9036VBZbe
not9037RBnot
important9038JJimportant
to9039TOto
price9040NNprice
...9041:...
to9042TOto
proximate9043JJproximate
cause9044NNcause
in9045INin
the9046DTthe
sense9047NNsense
that9048IN/thatthat
whether9049INwhether
...9050:...
I9051PPI
think9052VVPthink
,9053,,
under9054INunder
direct9055JJdirect
proximate9056JJproximate
cause9057NNcause
,9058,,
we9059PPwe
're9060VBPbe
buying9061VVGbuy
the9062DTthe
app9063NNapp
directly9064RBdirectly
from9065INfrom
the9066DTthe
app9067NPApp
developer9068NNdeveloper
,9069,,
and9070CCand
,9071,,
remember9072VVPremember
,9073,,
a9074DTa
key9075JJkey
part9076NNpart
of9077INof
my9078PP$my
answer9079NNanswer
was9080VBDbe
the9081DTthe
app9082NPApp
developer9083NNdeveloper
can9084MDcan
set9085VVset
that9086DTthat
price9087NNprice
competitively9088RBcompetitively
in9089INin
a9090DTa
competitive9091JJcompetitive
market9092NNmarket
.9093SENT.
What9094WPWhat
arrangements9095NNSarrangement
happen9096VVPhappen
between9097INbetween
Apple9098NPApple
exercising9099VVGexercise
its9100PP$its
monopoly9101NNmonopoly
control9102NNcontrol
through9103INthrough
the9104DTthe
App9105NPApp
Store9106NPStore
and9107CCand
the9108DTthe
supplier9109NNsupplier
is9110VBZbe
not9111RBnot
something9112NNsomething
we9113PPwe
are9114VBPbe
proximately9115RBproximately
...9116:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]9117LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
Your9118PP$your
...9119:...
your9120PP$your
...9121:...
[MR. FREDERICK]9122LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
...9123:...
affected9124VVNaffect
by9125INby
that9126DTthat
.9127SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]9128LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
Sorry9129JJsorry
to9130TOto
interrupt9131VVinterrupt
.9132SENT.
Your9133PP$your
point9134NNpoint
was9135VBDbe
that9136IN/thatthat
the9137DTthe
other9138JJother
side9139NNside
is9140VBZbe
putting9141VVGput
form9142NNform
over9143INover
the9144DTthe
reality9145NNreality
?9146SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]9147LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
That9148DTthat
's9149VBZbe
correct9150JJcorrect
.9151SENT.
And9152CCand
...9153:...
and9154CCand
they9155PPthey
're9156VBPbe
doing9157VVGdo
it9158PPit
in9159INin
a9160DTa
way9161NNway
that9162WDTthat
is9163VBZbe
particularly9164RBparticularly
standardless9165JJstandardless
,9166,,
because9167INbecause
what9168WPwhat
the9169DTthe
court9170NNcourt
in9171INin
UtiliCorp9172NPUtiliCorp
held9173VVDhold
was9174VBDbe
that9175IN/thatthat
even9176RBeven
when9177WRBwhen
it9178PPit
is9179VBZbe
absolutely9180RBabsolutely
clear9181JJclear
1009182CD@card@
percent9183NNpercent
of9184INof
the9185DTthe
over-charge9186NNover-charge
is9187VBZbe
going9188VVGgo
from9189INfrom
the9190DTthe
natural9191JJnatural
gas9192NNgas
supplier9193NNsupplier
through9194INthrough
the9195DTthe
utility9196NNutility
directly9197RBdirectly
to9198TOto
the9199DTthe
consumer9200NNconsumer
,9201,,
this9202DTthis
Court9203NPCourt
held9204VVNhold
:9205::
No9206UHNo
,9207,,
we9208PPwe
're9209VBPbe
going9210VVGgo
to9211TOto
keep9212VVkeep
the9213DTthe
bright-line9214NNbright-line
rule9215NNrule
.9216SENT.
Only9217RBonly
the9218DTthe
utility9219NNutility
gets9220VVZget
to9221TOto
complain9222VVcomplain
about9223INabout
the9224DTthe
natural9225JJnatural
gas9226NNgas
over-charge9227NNSover-charge
.9228SENT.
And9229CCand
it9230PPit
was9231VBDbe
that9232DTthat
bright-line9233NNbright-line
rule9234NNrule
that9235IN/thatthat
the9236DTthe
Court9237NNcourt
said9238VVDsay
is9239VBZbe
going9240VVGgo
to9241TOto
apply9242VVapply
.9243SENT.
And9244CCand
the9245DTthe
reason9246NNreason
is9247VBZbe
exactly9248RBexactly
,9249,,
Justice9250NPJustice
Alito9251NPAlito
,9252,,
for9253INfor
the9254DTthe
point9255NNpoint
that9256IN/thatthat
you9257PPyou
made9258VVDmake
,9259,,
which9260WDTwhich
is9261VBZbe
that9262IN/thatthat
it9263PPit
's9264VBZbe
about9265RBabout
judicial9266JJjudicial
administration9267NNadministration
at9268INat
the9269DTthe
pleadings9270NNSpleading
stage9271NNstage
.9272SENT.
We9273PPwe
're9274VBPbe
just9275RBjust
trying9276VVGtry
to9277TOto
figure9278VVfigure
out9279RPout
who9280WPwho
has9281VHZhave
the9282DTthe
claim9283NNclaim
and9284CCand
who9285WPwho
could9286MDcould
complain9287VVcomplain
about9288INabout
the9289DTthe
antitrust9290JJantitrust
violation9291NNviolation
.9292SENT.
Here9293RBhere
,9294,,
that9295WDTthat
's9296VBZbe
clearly9297RBclearly
the9298DTthe
consumers9299NNSconsumer
because9300INbecause
we9301PPwe
're9302VBPbe
the9303DTthe
ones9304NNSone
who9305WPwho
are9306VBPbe
paying9307VVGpay
Apple9308NPApple
the9309DTthe
money9310NNmoney
to9311TOto
receive9312VVreceive
the9313DTthe
app9314NPApp
.9315SENT.
And9316CCand
so9317RBso
,9318,,
to9319TOto
...9320:...
to9321TOto
Justice9322NPJustice
Kavanaugh9323NPKavanaugh
,9324,,
to9325TOto
finish9326VVfinish
off9327RPoff
the9328DTthe
point9329NNpoint
,9330,,
what9331WPwhat
the9332DTthe
other9333JJother
side9334NNside
is9335VBZbe
essentially9336RBessentially
asking9337VVGask
is9338VBZbe
that9339IN/thatthat
,9340,,
instead9341RBinstead
of9342INof
having9343VHGhave
a9344DTa
bright-line9345NNbright-line
rule9346NNrule
,9347,,
it9348PPit
's9349VBZbe
a9350DTa
very9351RBvery
fuzzy9352JJfuzzy
rule9353NNrule
,9354,,
because9355INbecause
they9356PPthey
do9357VVPdo
n't9358RBn't
have9359VHhave
a9360DTa
test9361NNtest
for9362INfor
what9363WPwhat
constitutes9364VVZconstitute
a9365DTa
pass-through9366JJpass-through
.9367SENT.
They9368PPthey
do9369VVPdo
n't9370RBn't
have9371VHhave
a9372DTa
test9373NNtest
that9374WDTthat
applies9375VVZapply
when9376WRBwhen
there9377EXthere
is9378VBZbe
no9379DTno
middleman9380NNmiddleman
.9381SENT.
There9382EXthere
's9383VBZbe
no9384DTno
middleman9385NNmiddleman
in9386INin
this9387DTthis
particular9388JJparticular
transaction9389NNtransaction
.9390SENT.
It9391PPit
's9392VBZbe
directly9393RBdirectly
between9394INbetween
the9395DTthe
iPhone9396NNiPhone
owner9397NNowner
and9398CCand
Apple9399NPApple
.9400SENT.
And9401CCand
so9402RBso
you9403PPyou
're9404VBPbe
going9405VVGgo
to9406TOto
have9407VHhave
to9408TOto
figure9409VVfigure
out9410RPout
,9411,,
do9412VVdo
they9413PPthey
get9414VVget
a9415DTa
one9416CDone
ticket9417NNticket
good9418JJgood
for9419INfor
this9420DTthis
case9421NNcase
only9422RBonly
?9423SENT?
They9424PPthey
happen9425VVPhappen
to9426TOto
be9427VBbe
the9428DTthe
largest9429JJSlarge
company9430NNcompany
in9431INin
the9432DTthe
world9433NNworld
,9434,,
or9435CCor
at9436INat
least9437JJSleast
they9438PPthey
were9439VBDbe
some9440DTsome
weeks9441NNSweek
ago9442RBago
,9443,,
and9444CCand
they9445PPthey
are9446VBPbe
able9447JJable
to9448TOto
extract9449VVextract
monopoly9450NNmonopoly
pricing9451NNpricing
by9452INby
virtue9453NNvirtue
of9454INof
a9455DTa
unique9456JJunique
e-commerce9457NPe-commerce
monopoly9458NNmonopoly
on9459INon
their9460PP$their
App9461NPApp
Store9462NPStore
.9463SENT.
[JUSTICE ALITO]9464LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
What9465WPWhat
concerns9466VVZconcern
me9467PPme
about9468INabout
your9469PP$your
argument9470NNargument
is9471VBZbe
that9472IN/thatthat
it9473PPit
does9474VVZdo
n't9475RBn't
seem9476VVseem
to9477TOto
be9478VBbe
based9479VVNbase
on9480INon
the9481DTthe
way9482NNway
in9483INin
which9484WDTwhich
this9485DTthis
claim9486NNclaim
was9487VBDbe
understood9488VVNunderstand
by9489INby
the9490DTthe
lower9491JJRlow
courts9492NNScourt
.9493SENT.
Maybe9494RBmaybe
they9495PPthey
misunderstood9496VVDmisunderstand
it9497PPit
.9498SENT.
But9499CCbut
,9500,,
I9501PPI
mean9502VVPmean
,9503,,
the9504DTthe
opening9505NNopening
line9506NNline
of9507INof
the9508DTthe
...9509:...
the9510DTthe
order9511NNorder
granting9512VVGgrant
Apple9513NPApple
's9514POS's
motion9515NNmotion
to9516TOto
dismiss9517VVdismiss
the9518DTthe
second9519JJsecond
amended9520VVNamend
complaint9521NNcomplaint
by9522INby
the9523DTthe
district9524NNdistrict
court9525NNcourt
:9526::
"9527``"
The9528DTthe
thrust9529NNthrust
of9530INof
Plaintiff9531NPPlaintiff
's9532POS's
second9533JJsecond
amended9534VVNamend
complaint9535NNcomplaint
is9536VBZbe
that9537IN/thatthat
Apple9538NPApple
has9539VHZhave
engaged9540VVNengage
in9541INin
antitrust9542JJantitrust
conduct9543NNconduct
by9544INby
collecting9545VVGcollect
309546CD@card@
percent9547NNpercent
of9548INof
the9549DTthe
price9550NNprice
of9551INof
iPhone9552NNiPhone
applications9553NNSapplication
.9554SENT.
"9555''"
[MR. FREDERICK]9556LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
The9557DTthe
district9558NNdistrict
court9559NNcourt
just9560RBjust
missed9561VVDmiss
it9562PPit
,9563,,
Justice9564NPJustice
Alito9565NPAlito
,9566,,
respectfully9567RBrespectfully
.9568SENT.
[JUSTICE ALITO]9569LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
And9570CCand
where9571WRBwhere
...9572:...
okay9573JJokay
.9574SENT.
Where9575WRBwhere
...9576:...
can9577MDcan
you9578PPyou
point9579VVpoint
to9580TOto
me9581PPme
where9582WRBwhere
in9583INin
the9584DTthe
Ninth9585JJninth
Circu9586NPCircu
it9587PPit
's9588VBZbe
opinion9589NNopinion
they9590PPthey
understood9591VVDunderstand
your9592PP$your
claim9593NNclaim
in9594INin
the9595DTthe
way9596NNway
that9597IN/thatthat
you9598PPyou
've9599VHPhave
characterized9600VVNcharacterize
it9601PPit
this9602DTthis
morning9603NNmorning
?9604SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]9605LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Yeah9606UHYeah
,9607,,
they9608PPthey
said9609VVDsay
on9610INon
page9611NNpage
21a9612JJ21a
of9613INof
the9614DTthe
petition9615NNpetition
app9616NNapp
...9617:...
I9618PPI
think9619VVPthink
that9620DTthat
's9621VBZbe
the9622DTthe
page9623NNpage
...9624:...
that9625IN/thatthat
this9626DTthis
is9627VBZbe
simply9628RBsimply
about9629INabout
a9630DTa
monopoly9631NNmonopoly
distribution9632NNdistribution
and9633CCand
that9634IN/thatthat
it9635PPit
is9636VBZbe
a9637DTa
simple9638JJsimple
case9639NNcase
as9640INas
a9641DTa
result9642NNresult
of9643INof
that9644DTthat
.9645SENT.
If9646INif
you9647PPyou
look9648VVPlook
at9649INat
the9650DTthe
bottom9651NNbottom
of9652INof
21a9653NP21a
,9654,,
the9655DTthe
very9656RBvery
last9657JJlast
paragraph9658NNparagraph
:9659::
"9660``"
Instead9661RBinstead
,9662,,
we9663PPwe
rest9664VVPrest
our9665PP$our
analysis9666NNanalysis
,9667,,
as9668RBas
compelled9669VVNcompel
by9670INby
Hanover9671NPHanover
Shoe9672NPShoe
,9673,,
Illinois9674NPIllinois
Brick9675NPBrick
,9676,,
UtiliCorp9677NPUtiliCorp
,9678,,
and9679CCand
Delaware9680NPDelaware
Valley9681NPValley
,9682,,
on9683INon
the9684DTthe
fundamental9685JJfundamental
distinction9686NNdistinction
between9687INbetween
a9688DTa
manufacturer9689NNmanufacturer
or9690CCor
producer9691NNproducer
on9692INon
the9693DTthe
one9694CDone
hand9695NNhand
and9696CCand
a9697DTa
distributor9698NNdistributor
on9699INon
the9700DTthe
other9701JJother
.9702SENT.
"9703''"
Apple9704NPApple
is9705VBZbe
a9706DTa
distributor9707NNdistributor
of9708INof
the9709DTthe
iPhone9710NNiPhone
apps9711NNSapps
,9712,,
selling9713VVGsell
them9714PPthem
directly9715RBdirectly
to9716TOto
purchasers9717NNSpurchaser
through9718INthrough
its9719PP$its
App9720NPApp
Store9721NPStore
.9722SENT.
And9723CCand
because9724INbecause
of9725INof
that9726DTthat
,9727,,
we9728PPwe
have9729VHPhave
standing9730NNstanding
to9731TOto
complain9732VVcomplain
that9733IN/thatthat
they9734PPthey
are9735VBPbe
the9736DTthe
seller9737NNseller
of9738INof
the9739DTthe
apps9740NNSapps
.9741SENT.
That's9742NNSThat's
...9743:...
it9744PPit
's9745VBZbe
a9746DTa
very9747RBvery
simple9748JJsimple
case9749NNcase
in9750INin
that9751DTthat
...9752:...
as9753RBas
viewed9754VVNview
through9755INthrough
that9756DTthat
lens9757NNlens
.9758SENT.
Now9759RBnow
I9760PPI
accept9761VVPaccept
,9762,,
Justice9763NPJustice
Alito9764NPAlito
,9765,,
that9766IN/thatthat
there9767EXthere
have9768VHPhave
been9769VBNbe
a9770DTa
lot9771NNlot
of9772INof
arguments9773NNSargument
and9774CCand
this9775DTthis
idea9776NNidea
about9777INabout
the9778DTthe
309779CD@card@
percent9780NNpercent
has9781VHZhave
led9782VVNlead
to9783TOto
a9784DTa
certain9785JJcertain
lack9786NNlack
of9787INof
clarity9788NNclarity
,9789,,
but9790CCbut
I9791PPI
think9792VVPthink
that9793IN/thatthat
the9794DTthe
position9795NNposition
we9796PPwe
have9797VHPhave
written9798VVNwrite
in9799INin
our9800PP$our
brief9801NNbrief
is9802VBZbe
the9803DTthe
best9804JJSgood
articulation9805NNarticulation
of9806INof
what9807WPwhat
the9808DTthe
underlying9809VVGunderlie
theory9810NNtheory
is9811VBZbe
here9812RBhere
,9813,,
and9814CCand
that9815WDTthat
is9816VBZbe
that9817IN/thatthat
the9818DTthe
Apple9819NPApple
monopoly9820NNmonopoly
App9821NPApp
Store9822NPStore
over-charges9823VVZover-charges
iPhone9824NNiPhone
owners9825NNSowner
for9826INfor
apps9827NNSapps
.9828SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]9829LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
And9830CCand
...9831:...
and9832CCand
...9833:...
and9834CCand
the9835DTthe
rule9836NNrule
of9837INof
the9838DTthe
end9839NNend
in9840INin
99-cent9841JJ99-cent
requirement9842NNrequirement
in9843INin
that9844DTthat
theory9845NNtheory
is9846VBZbe
what9847WPwhat
?9848SENT?
In9849INin
other9850JJother
words9851NNSword
,9852,,
would9853MDwould
your9854PP$your
theory9855NNtheory
be9856VBbe
the9857DTthe
same9858JJsame
if9859INif
no9860DTno
such9861JJsuch
requirement9862NNrequirement
existed9863VVDexist
,9864,,
or9865CCor
would9866MDwould
it9867PPit
not9868RBnot
?9869SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]9870LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
It9871PPit
would9872MDwould
be9873VBbe
still9874RBstill
an9875DTan
over-charge9876JJover-charge
case9877NNcase
,9878,,
Justice9879NPJustice
Kagan9880NPKagan
,9881,,
because9882INbecause
the9883DTthe
theory9884NNtheory
economically9885RBeconomically
is9886VBZbe
that9887IN/thatthat
,9888,,
if9889INif
you9890PPyou
are9891VBPbe
having9892VHGhave
to9893TOto
buy9894VVbuy
only9895RBonly
from9896INfrom
a9897DTa
monopoly9898NNmonopoly
,9899,,
you9900PPyou
are9901VBPbe
paying9902VVGpay
more9903RBRmore
than9904INthan
you9905PPyou
would9906MDwould
if9907INif
there9908EXthere
was9909VBDbe
a9910DTa
,9911,,
you9912PPyou
know9913VVPknow
,9914,,
discount9915NNdiscount
apps9916NNSapps
warehouse9917NNwarehouse
or9918CCor
you9919PPyou
could9920MDcould
buy9921VVbuy
directly9922RBdirectly
from9923INfrom
the9924DTthe
app9925NPApp
's9926POS's
developer9927NNdeveloper
.9928SENT.
Our9929PP$our
assertion9930NNassertion
is9931VBZbe
that9932IN/thatthat
,9933,,
with9934INwith
multiple9935JJmultiple
sellers9936NNSseller
,9937,,
multiple9938JJmultiple
suppliers9939NNSsupplier
of9940INof
the9941DTthe
apps9942NNSapps
,9943,,
we9944PPwe
would9945MDwould
be9946VBbe
able9947JJable
to9948TOto
buy9949VVbuy
them9950PPthem
at9951INat
a9952DTa
lower9953JJRlow
price9954NNprice
.9955SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]9956LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
So9957INso
what9958WPwhat
's9959VBZbe
the9960DTthe
significance9961NNsignificance
...9962:...
[MR. FREDERICK]9963LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
It9964PPit
's9965VBZbe
that9966DTthat
competition9967NNcompetition
.9968SENT.
[JUSTICE KAGAN]9969LOC[JUSTICE KAGAN]
...9970:...
of9971INof
that9972DTthat
end9973NNend
in9974INin
99-cent9975JJ99-cent
rule9976NNrule
?9977SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]9978LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
The9979DTthe
significance9980NNsignificance
of9981INof
it9982PPit
is9983VBZbe
that9984IN/thatthat
it9985PPit
informs9986VVZinform
the9987DTthe
price9988NNprice
elevation9989NNelevation
and9990CCand
the9991DTthe
price9992NNprice
over-charge9993NNover-charge
.9994SENT.
And9995CCand
it9996PPit
also9997RBalso
informs9998VVZinform
that9999IN/thatthat
,10000,,
contrary10001JJcontrary
to10002TOto
Apple10003NPApple
's10004POS's
assertion10005NNassertion
,10006,,
they10007PPthey
are10008VBPbe
not10009RBnot
the10010DTthe
agent10011NNagent
of10012INof
the10013DTthe
apps10014NNSapps
developers10015NNSdeveloper
.10016SENT.
I10017PPI
mean10018VVPmean
,10019,,
they10020PPthey
put10021VVDput
that10022IN/thatthat
in10023INin
their10024PP$their
contract10025NNcontract
.10026SENT.
That's10027NPThat's
...10028:...
that10029WDTthat
's10030VBZbe
where10031WRBwhere
you10032PPyou
get10033VVPget
to10034TOto
Justice10035NPJustice
Gorsuch10036NPGorsuch
's10037POS's
form10038NNform
over10039INover
substance10040NNsubstance
problem10041NNproblem
,10042,,
because10043RBbecause
,10044,,
at10045INat
9910046CD@card@
cents10047NNScent
,10048,,
they10049PPthey
're10050VBPbe
telling10051VVGtell
the10052DTthe
app10053NPApp
developer10054NNdeveloper
,10055,,
we10056PPwe
're10057VBPbe
foreclosing10058VVGforeclose
from10059INfrom
you10060PPyou
9910061CD@card@
percent10062NNpercent
of10063INof
all10064DTall
pricing10065NNpricing
options10066NNSoption
.10067SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]10068LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
Well10069UHWell
,10070,,
if10071INif
it10072PPit
's10073VBZbe
that10074DTthat
significant10075JJsignificant
,10076,,
why10077WRBwhy
did10078VVDdo
n't10079RBn't
you10080PPyou
include10081VVPinclude
it10082PPit
in10083INin
the10084DTthe
complaint10085NNcomplaint
?10086SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]10087LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Because10088INbecause
it10089PPit
's10090VBZbe
not10091RBnot
significant10092JJsignificant
from10093INfrom
this10094DTthis
perspective10095NNperspective
,10096,,
Mr10097NPMr
.10098SENT.
Chief10099NPChief
Justice10100NPJustice
,10101,,
and10102CCand
that10103WDTthat
is10104VBZbe
that10105IN/thatthat
,10106,,
with10107INwith
an10108DTan
...10109:...
a10110DTa
monopoly10111NNmonopoly
store10112NNstore
,10113,,
the10114DTthe
prices10115NNSprice
are10116VBPbe
over-charged10117VVNover-charged
,10118,,
our10119PP$our
theory10120NNtheory
is10121VBZbe
relatively10122RBrelatively
simple10123JJsimple
.10124SENT.
They10125PPthey
brought10126VVDbring
up10127RPup
the10128DTthe
9910129CD@card@
cents10130NNScent
in10131INin
the10132DTthe
blue10133JJblue
brief10134NNbrief
.10135SENT.
I10136PPI
think10137VVPthink
it10138PPit
's10139VBZbe
at10140INat
page10141NNpage
910142CD9
of10143INof
their10144PP$their
brief10145NNbrief
where10146WRBwhere
they10147PPthey
raise10148VVPraise
the10149DTthe
9910150CD@card@
cent10151NNcent
issue10152NNissue
.10153SENT.
And10154CCand
as10155INas
we10156PPwe
were10157VBDbe
thinking10158VVGthink
about10159INabout
what10160WPwhat
the10161DTthe
implications10162NNSimplication
of10163INof
that10164WDTthat
were10165VBDbe
,10166,,
it10167PPit
became10168VVDbecome
clear10169JJclear
to10170TOto
us10171PPus
that10172IN/thatthat
that10173WDTthat
meant10174VVDmean
the10175DTthe
app10176NPApp
developer10177NNdeveloper
could10178MDcould
n't10179RBn't
possibly10180RBpossibly
be10181VBbe
...10182:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]10183LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
Sounds10184VVZsound
kind10185NNkind
of10186INof
late10187JJlate
in10188INin
the10189DTthe
day10190NNday
...10191:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10192LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
It10193PPit
's10194VBZbe
another10195DTanother
...10196:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]10197LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
...10198:...
to10199TOto
come10200VVcome
up10201RPup
with10202INwith
a10203DTa
new10204JJnew
litigation10205NNlitigation
theory10206NNtheory
.10207SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]10208LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well10209UHWell
,10210,,
no10211UHno
,10212,,
we10213PPwe
're10214VBPbe
at10215INat
a10216DTa
pleadings10217NNSpleading
stage10218NNstage
,10219,,
Justice10220NPJustice
Gorsuch10221NPGorsuch
.10222SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]10223LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
In10224INin
the10225DTthe
Supreme10226NPSupreme
Court10227NPCourt
,10228,,
a10229DTa
blue10230JJblue
brief10231NNbrief
,10232,,
really10233RBreally
?10234SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]10235LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well10236UHwell
,10237,,
it10238PPit
's10239VBZbe
their10240PP$their
...10241:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]10242LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
I10243PPI
mean10244VVPmean
,10245,,
should10246MDshould
we10247PPwe
be10248VBbe
taking10249VVGtake
that10250IN/thatthat
up10251RBup
now10252RBnow
?10253SENT?
I10254PPI
mean10255VVPmean
,10256,,
maybe10257RBmaybe
you10258PPyou
can10259MDcan
amend10260VVamend
your10261PP$your
complaint10262NNcomplaint
or10263CCor
something10264NNsomething
like10265VVPlike
that10266IN/thatthat
on10267INon
remand10268NNremand
,10269,,
but10270CCbut
should10271MDshould
we10272PPwe
be10273VBbe
addressing10274VVGaddress
that10275DTthat
?10276SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]10277LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well10278UHWell
,10279,,
Justice10280NPJustice
Gorsuch10281NPGorsuch
,10282,,
they10283PPthey
were10284VBDbe
the10285DTthe
ones10286NNSone
,10287,,
is10288VBZbe
what10289WPwhat
I10290PPI
'm10291VBPbe
saying10292VVGsay
,10293,,
that10294WDTthat
brought10295VVDbring
up10296RPup
the10297DTthe
9910298CD@card@
cents10299NNScent
.10300SENT.
It10301PPit
was10302VBDbe
n't10303RBn't
us10304PPus
.10305SENT.
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]10306LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
But10307CCbut
we10308PPwe
're10309VBPbe
usually10310RBusually
...10311:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10312LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
It10313PPit
's10314VBZbe
not10315RBnot
...10316:...
[JUSTICE GORSUCH]10317LOC[JUSTICE GORSUCH]
...10318:...
a10319DTa
court10320NNcourt
of10321INof
review10322NNreview
,10323,,
not10324RBnot
first10325JJfirst
view10326NNview
,10327,,
right10328RBright
.10329SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]10330LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well10331UHWell
,10332,,
no10333UHno
,10334,,
our10335PP$our
point10336NNpoint
was10337VBDbe
that10338IN/thatthat
when10339WRBwhen
they10340PPthey
raised10341VVDraise
the10342DTthe
9910343CD@card@
cents10344NNScent
is10345VBZbe
somehow10346RBsomehow
proof10347JJproof
that10348IN/thatthat
the10349DTthe
developer10350NNdeveloper
actually10351RBactually
gets10352VVZget
to10353TOto
set10354VVset
the10355DTthe
price10356NNprice
,10357,,
we10358PPwe
say10359VVPsay
,10360,,
no10361RBno
,10362,,
it10363PPit
's10364VBZbe
actually10365RBactually
irrelevant10366JJirrelevant
for10367INfor
the10368DTthe
reasons10369NNSreason
which10370WDTwhich
I10371PPI
've10372VHPhave
already10373RBalready
stated10374VVNstate
.10375SENT.
But10376CCbut
,10377,,
secondly10378RBsecondly
,10379,,
it10380PPit
's10381VBZbe
just10382RBjust
wrong10383JJwrong
because10384INbecause
,10385,,
if10386INif
you10387PPyou
're10388VBPbe
constraining10389VVGconstrain
what10390WPwhat
9910391CD@card@
percent10392NNpercent
of10393INof
the10394DTthe
pricing10395NNpricing
options10396NNSoption
are10397VBPbe
,10398,,
you10399PPyou
know10400VVPknow
,10401,,
that10402WDTthat
...10403:...
that10404WDTthat
's10405VBZbe
...10406:...
it10407PPit
is10408VBZbe
what10409WPwhat
it10410PPit
is10411VBZbe
.10412SENT.
But10413CCbut
it10414PPit
also10415RBalso
has10416VHZhave
the10417DTthe
effect10418NNeffect
economically10419RBeconomically
of10420INof
raising10421VVGraise
the10422DTthe
prices10423NNSprice
...10424:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10425LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
It10426PPit
's10427VBZbe
going10428VVGgo
to10429TOto
...10430:...
[MR. FREDERICK]10431LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
...10432:...
that10433IN/thatthat
the10434DTthe
consumers10435NNSconsumer
have10436VHPhave
...10437:...
have10438VHPhave
to10439TOto
pay10440VVpay
.10441SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10442LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
It10443PPit
's10444VBZbe
going10445VVGgo
to10446TOto
add10447VVadd
to10448TOto
your10449PP$your
damages10450NNSdamage
,10451,,
correct10452JJcorrect
?10453SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]10454LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Well10455UHwell
,10456,,
it10457PPit
...10458:...
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10459LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
Potentially10460RBpotentially
.10461SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]10462LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
...10463:...
it10464PPit
could10465MDcould
potentially10466RBpotentially
add10467VVadd
to10468TOto
the10469DTthe
damages10470NNSdamage
or10471CCor
it10472PPit
could10473MDcould
subtract10474VVsubtract
from10475INfrom
the10476DTthe
damages10477NNSdamage
.10478SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10479LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
Correct10480JJcorrect
.10481SENT.
[MR. FREDERICK]10482LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
We10483PPwe
do10484VVPdo
n't10485RBn't
know10486VVknow
.10487SENT.
What10488WPWhat
we10489PPwe
know10490VVPknow
is10491VBZbe
what10492WPwhat
the10493DTthe
price10494NNprice
is10495VBZbe
in10496INin
a10497DTa
noncompetitive10498JJnoncompetitive
market10499NNmarket
,10500,,
and10501CCand
we10502PPwe
will10503MDwill
have10504VHhave
to10505TOto
have10506VHhave
experts10507NNSexpert
that10508WDTthat
will10509MDwill
assess10510VVassess
what10511WPwhat
the10512DTthe
damages10513NNSdamage
would10514MDwould
be10515VBbe
in10516INin
a10517DTa
competitive10518JJcompetitive
market10519NNmarket
.10520SENT.
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10521LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
Your10522PP$your
theory10523NNtheory
does10524VVZdo
n't10525RBn't
depend10526VVdepend
on10527INon
the10528DTthe
9910529CD@card@
cent10530NNcent
?10531SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]10532LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Our10533PP$our
theory10534NNtheory
of10535INof
damages10536NNSdamage
or10537CCor
our10538PP$our
theory10539NNtheory
of10540INof
the10541DTthe
violation10542NNviolation
?10543SENT?
[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]10544LOC[JUSTICE KAVANAUGH]
Well10545UHWell
,10546,,
the10547DTthe
...10548:...
[MR. FREDERICK]10549LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
The10550DTthe
theory10551NNtheory
of10552INof
the10553DTthe
violation10554NNviolation
is10555VBZbe
the10556DTthe
wholly-owned10557VVNwholly-own
monopoly10558NNmonopoly
App10559NPApp
Store10560NPStore
as10561INas
the10562DTthe
place10563NNplace
to10564TOto
sell10565VVsell
apps10566NNSapps
.10567SENT.
That10568DTthat
is10569VBZbe
what10570WPwhat
the10571DTthe
violation10572NNviolation
is10573VBZbe
here10574RBhere
.10575SENT.
And10576CCand
...10577:...
the10578DTthe
...10579:...
how10580WRBhow
you10581PPyou
calculate10582VVPcalculate
the10583DTthe
damages10584NNSdamage
is10585VBZbe
you10586PPyou
look10587VVPlook
at10588INat
what10589WPwhat
is10590VBZbe
the10591DTthe
over-charge10592NNover-charge
based10593VVNbase
on10594INon
what10595WPwhat
the10596DTthe
monopoly10597NNmonopoly
is10598VBZbe
selling10599VVGsell
the10600DTthe
app10601NPApp
for10602INfor
versus10603INversus
what10604WPwhat
it10605PPit
would10606MDwould
be10607VBbe
sold10608VVNsell
for10609INfor
in10610INin
a10611DTa
competitive10612JJcompetitive
market10613NNmarket
.10614SENT.
The10615DTthe
antitrust10616JJantitrust
scholars10617NNSscholar
,10618,,
and10619CCand
I10620PPI
would10621MDwould
direct10622VVdirect
you10623PPyou
to10624TOto
page10625VVpage
2310626CD@card@
of10627INof
their10628PP$their
brief10629NNbrief
,10630,,
they10631PPthey
go10632VVPgo
through10633INthrough
a10634DTa
lot10635NNlot
of10636INof
the10637DTthe
pricing10638NNpricing
scenarios10639NNSscenario
that10640IN/thatthat
you10641PPyou
have10642VHPhave
explored10643VVNexplore
through10644INthrough
hypotheticals10645NNShypotheticals
here10646RBhere
and10647CCand
they10648PPthey
make10649VVPmake
very10650RBvery
clear10651VVclear
that10652IN/thatthat
,10653,,
as10654INas
a10655DTa
matter10656NNmatter
of10657INof
function10658NNfunction
,10659,,
what10660WPwhat
is10661VBZbe
happening10662VVGhappen
here10663RBhere
is10664VBZbe
that10665IN/thatthat
the10666DTthe
monopoly10667NNmonopoly
seller10668NNseller
of10669INof
the10670DTthe
apps10671NNapps
here10672RBhere
is10673VBZbe
extracting10674VVGextract
an10675DTan
over-charge10676NNover-charge
from10677INfrom
the10678DTthe
purchasers10679NNSpurchaser
who10680WPwho
are10681VBPbe
direct10682JJdirect
purchasers10683NNSpurchaser
of10684INof
those10685DTthose
apps10686NNSapps
.10687SENT.
[JUSTICE ALITO]10688LOC[JUSTICE ALITO]
If10689INif
this10690DTthis
case10691NNcase
were10692VBDbe
to10693TOto
go10694VVgo
to10695TOto
trial10696NNtrial
as10697INas
a10698DTa
class10699NNclass
action10700NNaction
,10701,,
would10702MDwould
every10703DTevery
app10704NPApp
purchaser10705NNpurchaser
potentially10706RBpotentially
be10707VBbe
entitled10708VVNentitle
to10709TOto
three10710CDthree
times10711NNStime
the10712DTthe
3010713CD@card@
percent10714NNpercent
over-charge10715NNover-charge
,10716,,
or10717CCor
would10718MDwould
it10719PPit
depend10720VVdepend
on10721INon
the10722DTthe
particular10723JJparticular
app10724NPApp
?10725SENT?
[MR. FREDERICK]10726LOC[MR. FREDERICK]
Your10727PP$your
Honor10728NPHonor
,10729,,
I10730PPI
...10731:...
I10732PPI
think10733VVPthink
that10734DTthat
...10735:...
I10736PPI
do10737VVPdo
n't10738RBn't
know10739VVknow
the10740DTthe
answer10741NNanswer
to10742TOto
your10743PP$your
question10744NNquestion
fully10745RBfully
.10746SENT.
I10747PPI
'll10748MDwill
be10749VBbe
candid10750JJcandid
.10751SENT.
I10752PPI
have10753VHPhave
not10754RBnot
thought10755VVNthink
about10756RBabout
how10757WRBhow
the10758DTthe
experts10759NNSexpert
are10760VBPbe
actually10761RBactually
going10762VVGgo
to10763TOto
try10764VVtry
to10765TOto
prove10766VVprove
it10767PPit
up10768RPup
.10769SENT.
What10770WPWhat
I10771PPI
would10772MDwould
say10773VVsay
,10774,,
though10775RBthough
,10776,,
is10777VBZbe
that10778IN/thatthat
they10779PPthey
're10780VBPbe
probably10781RBprobably
...10782:...
what10783WPwhat
will10784MDwill
likely10785RBlikely
happen10786VVhappen
is10787VBZbe
that10788IN/thatthat
because10789INbecause
there10790EXthere
are10791VBPbe
apps10792NNSapps
that10793WDTthat
are10794VBPbe
sold10795VVNsell
at10796INat
9910797CD@card@
cent10798NNcent
,10799,,
a10800DTa
huge10801JJhuge
number10802NNnumber
of10803INof
them10804PPthem
are10805VBPbe
free10806JJfree
,10807,,
but10808CCbut
a10809DTa
huge10810JJhuge
number10811NNnumber
are10812VBPbe
sold10813VVNsell
at10814INat
9910815CD@card@
cents10816NNScent
,10817,,
some10818DTsome
other10819JJother
strata10820NNSstratum
is10821VBZbe
sold10822VVNsell
for10823INfor
$10824$$
110825CD1
.10826SENT.
9910827CD@card@
,10828,,
some10829DTsome
other10830JJother
strata10831NNSstratum
is10832VBZbe
sold10833VVNsell
for10834INfor
$10835$$
210836CD2
.10837SENT.
9910838CD@card@
or10839CCor
$10840$$
610841CD6
.10842SENT.
9910843CD@card@
,10844,,
and10845CCand
I10846PPI
have10847VHPhave
n't10848RBn't
put10849VVNput
my10850PP$my
head10851NNhead
around10852RBaround
,10853,,
to10854TOto
be10855VBbe
perfectly10856RBperfectly
honest10857JJhonest
,10858,,
exactly10859RBexactly
how10860WRBhow
you10861PPyou
would10862MDwould
carve10863VVcarve
up10864RPup
the10865DTthe
damages10866NNSdamage
on10867INon
some10868DTsome
sort10869NNsort
of10870INof
a10871DTa
pro10872JJpro
rata10873NNrata
basis10874NNbasis
.10875SENT.
But10876CCbut
the10877DTthe
idea10878NNidea
,10879,,
of10880INof
course10881NNcourse
,10882,,
of10883INof
the10884DTthe
Clayton10885NPClayton
Act10886NPAct
is10887VBZbe
that10888IN/thatthat
treble10889JJtreble
damages10890NNSdamage
is10891VBZbe
designed10892VVNdesign
to10893TOto
deter10894VVdeter
antitrust10895JJantitrust
violations10896NNSviolation
.10897SENT.
And10898CCand
so10899INso
this10900DTthis
Court10901NPCourt
has10902VHZhave
made10903VVNmake
very10904RBvery
clear10905JJclear
in10906INin
its10907PP$its
cases10908NNScase
that10909IN/thatthat
the10910DTthe
point10911NNpoint
of10912INof
having10913VHGhave
that10914DTthat
deterrence10915NNdeterrence
is10916VBZbe
to10917TOto
avoid10918VVavoid
having10919VHGhave
the10920DTthe
monopolist10921NNmonopolist
in10922INin
this10923DTthis
case10924NNcase
act10925NNact
in10926INin
a10927DTa
way10928NNway
that10929IN/thatthat
it10930PPit
's10931VBZbe
not10932RBnot
penalized10933VVNpenalize
for10934INfor
its10935PP$its
monopoly10936NNmonopoly
behavior10937NNbehavior
.10938SENT.
And10939CCand
if10940INif
you10941PPyou
were10942VBDbe
to10943TOto
suppose10944VVsuppose
that10945IN/thatthat
it10946PPit
was10947VBDbe
just10948RBjust
a10949DTa
single10950JJsingle
damages10951NNSdamage
problem10952NNproblem
,10953,,
it10954PPit
would10955MDwould
be10956VBbe
easy10957JJeasy
for10958INfor
monopolists10959NNSmonopolist
to10960TOto
simply10961RBsimply
act10962VVact
,10963,,
and10964CCand
,10965,,
if10966INif
they10967PPthey
get10968VVPget
caught10969VVNcatch
,10970,,
they10971PPthey
just10972RBjust
simply10973RBsimply
pay10974VVpay
over10975RPover
what10976WPwhat
they10977PPthey
caused10978VVDcause
in10979INin
damage10980NNdamage
,10981,,
but10982CCbut
the10983DTthe
idea10984NNidea
behind10985INbehind
the10986DTthe
Clayton10987NPClayton
Act10988NPAct
's10989POS's
treble10990JJtreble
damages10991NNSdamage
remedy10992NNremedy
is10993VBZbe
designed10994VVNdesign
to10995TOto
deter10996VVdeter
actions10997NNSaction
just10998RBjust
like10999INlike
this11000DTthis
.11001SENT.
And11002CCand
that11003DTthat
is11004VBZbe
why11005WRBwhy
Apple11006NPApple
cannot11007MDcan
point11008VVpoint
to11009TOto
another11010DTanother
e-commerce11011NPe-commerce
distributor11012NNdistributor
that11013WDTthat
does11014VVZdo
what11015WPwhat
it11016PPit
does11017VVZdo
.11018SENT.
In11019INin
every11020DTevery
other11021JJother
instance11022NNinstance
,11023,,
as11024INas
we11025PPwe
point11026VVPpoint
out11027RPout
in11028INin
the11029DTthe
red11030JJred
brief11031NNbrief
,11032,,
there11033EXthere
is11034VBZbe
an11035DTan
alternative11036NNalternative
to11037TOto
buying11038VVGbuy
the11039DTthe
product11040NNproduct
.11041SENT.
And11042CCand
,11043,,
in11044INin
fact11045NNfact
,11046,,
Apple11047NPApple
does11048VVZdo
n't11049RBn't
even11050RBeven
do11051VVdo
this11052DTthis
with11053INwith
its11054PP$its
own11055JJown
computer11056NNcomputer
software11057NNsoftware
.11058SENT.
And11059CCand
we11060PPwe
have11061VHPhave
pleaded11062VVNplead
that11063IN/thatthat
in11064INin
the11065DTthe
complaint11066NNcomplaint
,11067,,
Mr11068NPMr
.11069SENT.
Chief11070NPChief
Justice11071NPJustice
,11072,,
where11073WRBwhere
we11074PPwe
say11075VVPsay
that11076IN/thatthat
,11077,,
if11078INif
you11079PPyou
buy11080VVPbuy
software11081NNsoftware
,11082,,
you11083PPyou
can11084MDcan
buy11085VVbuy
it11086PPit
open11087VVopen
source11088NNsource
and11089CCand
you11090PPyou
do11091VVPdo
not11092RBnot
have11093VHhave
to11094TOto
buy11095VVbuy
it11096PPit
through11097INthrough
Apple11098NPApple
's11099POS's
monopoly11100NNmonopoly
chain11101NNchain
.11102SENT.
So11103INso
the11104DTthe
iPhone11105JJiPhone
app11106NPApp
monopoly11107NNmonopoly
App11108NPApp
Store11109NPStore
is11110VBZbe
a11111DTa
unique11112JJunique
feature11113NNfeature
of11114INof
the11115DTthe
e-commerce11116NPe-commerce
setting11117NNsetting
.11118SENT.
Apple11119NPApple
has11120VHZhave
found11121VVNfind
ways11122NNSway
using11123VVGuse
technology11124NNtechnology
and11125CCand
contractual11126JJcontractual
constraints11127NNSconstraint
to11128TOto
limit11129VVlimit
the11130DTthe
opportunity11131NNopportunity
of11132INof
a11133DTa
competitive11134JJcompetitive
market11135NNmarket
to11136TOto
flourish11137VVflourish
.11138SENT.
If11139INif
a11140DTa
competitive11141JJcompetitive
market11142NNmarket
did11143VVDdo
flourish11144VVflourish
,11145,,
the11146DTthe
prices11147NNSprice
that11148IN/thatthat
iPhone11149NNiPhone
owners11150NNSowner
pay11151VVPpay
would11152MDwould
be11153VBbe
lower11154JJRlow
.11155SENT.
Thank11156VVthank
you11157PPyou
.11158SENT.
counsel11159NNcounsel
.11160SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]11161LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
Thank11162VVthank
you11163PPyou
,11164,,
Three11165CDThree
minutes11166NNSminute
,11167,,
Mr11168NPMr
.11169SENT.
Wall11170NPWall
.11171SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]11172LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Thank11173VVthank
you11174PPyou
,11175,,
Mr11176NPMr
.11177SENT.
Chief11178NPChief
Justice11179NPJustice
.11180SENT.
I11181PPI
think11182VVPthink
I11183PPI
need11184VVPneed
to11185TOto
begin11186VVbegin
with11187INwith
the11188DTthe
experience11189NNexperience
I11190PPI
had11191VHDhave
in11192INin
this11193DTthis
case11194NNcase
for11195INfor
its11196PP$its
first11197JJfirst
nine11198CDnine
years11199NNSyear
,11200,,
and11201CCand
that11202WDTthat
is11203VBZbe
it11204PPit
was11205VBDbe
about11206RBabout
a11207DTa
percent11208NNpercent
commission11209NNcommission
.11210SENT.
Paragraph11211NNparagraph
4811212CD@card@
of11213INof
the11214DTthe
complaint11215NNcomplaint
is11216VBZbe
...11217:...
is11218VBZbe
...11219:...
is11220VBZbe
the11221DTthe
key11222JJkey
allegation11223NNallegation
,11224,,
which11225WDTwhich
is11226VBZbe
the11227DTthe
root11228NNroot
of11229INof
the11230DTthe
damages11231NNSdamage
theory11232NNtheory
,11233,,
which11234WDTwhich
maintains11235VVZmaintain
that11236IN/thatthat
the11237DTthe
percent11238NNpercent
commission11239NNcommission
is11240VBZbe
a11241DTa
monopoly11242NNmonopoly
price11243NNprice
.11244SENT.
It11245PPit
's11246VHZhave
called11247VVNcall
a11248DTa
monopoly11249NNmonopoly
price11250NNprice
.11251SENT.
It11252PPit
's11253VBZbe
elsewhere11254RBelsewhere
called11255VVNcall
a11256DTa
super-competitive11257JJsuper-competitive
price11258NNprice
.11259SENT.
It11260PPit
is11261VBZbe
the11262DTthe
root11263NNroot
of11264INof
the11265DTthe
damages11266NNSdamage
theory11267NNtheory
not11268RBnot
just11269RBjust
in11270INin
part11271NNpart
,11272,,
not11273RBnot
just11274RBjust
on11275INon
the11276DTthe
periphery11277NNperiphery
,11278,,
but11279CCbut
entirely11280RBentirely
.11281SENT.
The11282DTthe
brief11283NNbrief
in11284INin
opposition11285NNopposition
at11286INat
...11287:...
at11288INat
pages11289NNSpage
and11290CCand
1211291CD@card@
make11292VVPmake
this11293DTthis
unmistakably11294RBunmistakably
clear11295JJclear
.11296SENT.
At11297INat
...11298:...
at11299INat
page11300NNpage
511301CD5
,11302,,
the11303DTthe
brief11304NNbrief
in11305INin
opposition11306NNopposition
states11307NNSstate
:11308::
"11309``"
Respondents11310NNSrespondent
seek11311VVPseek
damages11312NNSdamage
based11313VVNbase
solely11314RBsolely
on11315INon
the11316DTthe
percent11317NNpercent
markup11318NNmarkup
.11319SENT.
"11320``"
So11321INso
whatever11322WDTwhatever
other11323JJother
attributes11324NNSattribute
of11325INof
this11326DTthis
case11327NNcase
one11328PPone
may11329MDmay
want11330VVwant
to11331TOto
talk11332VVtalk
about11333RBabout
that11334WDTthat
might11335MDmight
contribute11336VVcontribute
to11337TOto
the11338DTthe
liability11339NNliability
theory11340NNtheory
,11341,,
the11342DTthe
injury11343NNinjury
theory11344NNtheory
,11345,,
the11346DTthe
damages11347NNSdamage
theory11348NNtheory
,11349,,
is11350VBZbe
,11351,,
in11352INin
their11353PP$their
words11354NNSword
,11355,,
solely11356RBsolely
about11357INabout
the11358DTthe
...11359:...
the11360DTthe
3011361CD@card@
percent11362NNpercent
.11363SENT.
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]11364LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
Mr11365NPMr
.11366SENT.
Wall11367NPWall
,11368,,
I11369PPI
have11370VHPhave
a11371DTa
question11372NNquestion
about11373INabout
this11374DTthis
Court11375NPCourt
's11376POS's
case11377NNcase
law11378NNlaw
,11379,,
and11380CCand
I'd11381NNI'd
...11382:...
I11383PPI
'd11384MDwould
like11385VVlike
your11386PP$your
answer11387NNanswer
to11388TOto
it11389PPit
.11390SENT.
If11391INif
Apple11392NPApple
had11393VHDhave
in11394INin
every11395DTevery
agreement11396NNagreement
with11397INwith
an11398DTan
iPhone11399NNiPhone
owner11400NNowner
a11401DTa
provision11402NNprovision
that11403IN/thatthat
you11404PPyou
can11405MDcan
sue11406VVsue
...11407:...
you11408PPyou
can11409MDcan
't11410RB't
sue11411VVsue
,11412,,
you11413PPyou
have11414VHPhave
to11415TOto
go11416VVgo
to11417TOto
an11418DTan
arbitrable11419JJarbitrable
forum11420NNforum
in11421INin
a11422DTa
one-by-one11423JJone-by-one
...11424:...
[MR. D.M. WALL]11425LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Yes11426NPYes
.11427SENT.
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]11428LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
...11429:...
then11430RBthen
Apple11431NPApple
would11432MDwould
be11433VBbe
home11434RBhome
free11435JJfree
in11436INin
this11437DTthis
case11438NNcase
?11439SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]11440LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
We11441PPwe
...11442:...
we11443PPwe
do11444VVPdo
not11445RBnot
have11446VHhave
such11447PDTsuch
a11448DTa
provision11449NNprovision
.11450SENT.
In11451INin
fact11452NNfact
,11453,,
the11454DTthe
...11455:...
all11456DTall
of11457INof
the11458DTthe
relevant11459JJrelevant
agreements11460NNSagreement
with11461INwith
both11462DTboth
developers11463NNSdeveloper
and11464CCand
consumers11465NNSconsumer
state11466NNstate
that11467WDTthat
...11468:...
that11469IN/thatthat
there11470EXthere
shall11471MDshall
be11472VBbe
litigation11473NNlitigation
in11474INin
the11475DTthe
Northern11476NPNorthern
District11477NPDistrict
of11478INof
California11479NPCalifornia
.11480SENT.
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]11481LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
Yeah11482UHYeah
,11483,,
I11484PPI
...11485:...
I11486PPI
know11487VVPknow
...11488:...
I11489PPI
know11490VVPknow
you11491PPyou
do11492VVPdo
n't11493RBn't
,11494,,
but11495CCbut
suppose11496VVPsuppose
you11497PPyou
did11498VVDdo
.11499SENT.
[MR. D.M. WALL]11500LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
If11501INif
...11502:...
if11503INif
that11504WDTthat
were11505VBDbe
the11506DTthe
case11507NNcase
,11508,,
then11509RBthen
this11510DTthis
would11511MDwould
be11512VBbe
a11513DTa
matter11514NNmatter
for11515INfor
arbitration11516NNarbitration
,11517,,
and11518CCand
I11519PPI
do11520VVPdo
n't11521RBn't
think11522VVthink
it11523PPit
changes11524VVZchange
the11525DTthe
legal11526JJlegal
question11527NNquestion
.11528SENT.
[JUSTICE GINSBURG]11529LOC[JUSTICE GINSBURG]
And11530CCand
...11531:...
and11532CCand
it11533PPit
would11534MDwould
take11535VVtake
this11536DTthis
case11537NNcase
out11538RPout
of11539INof
this11540DTthis
Court11541NPCourt
,11542,,
put11543VVDput
it11544PPit
in11545INin
an11546DTan
arbitrable11547JJarbitrable
forum11548NNforum
,11549,,
with11550INwith
a11551DTa
single11552JJsingle
complainant11553NNcomplainant
?11554SENT?
[MR. D.M. WALL]11555LOC[MR. D.M. WALL]
Indeed11556RBindeed
,11557,,
it11558PPit
...11559:...
it11560PPit
would11561MDwould
,11562,,
but11563CCbut
that11564DTthat
's11565VBZbe
not11566RBnot
this11567DTthis
case11568NNcase
.11569SENT.
There11570EXthere
is11571VBZbe
...11572:...
there11573EXthere
is11574VBZbe
no11575DTno
concern11576NNconcern
about11577INabout
that11578DTthat
in11579INin
this11580DTthis
case11581NNcase
.11582SENT.
The11583DTthe
second11584JJsecond
point11585NNpoint
that11586IN/thatthat
I11587PPI
want11588VVPwant
to11589TOto
make11590VVmake
is11591VBZbe
...11592:...
relates11593VVZrelate
to11594TOto
this11595DTthis
duplicative11596JJduplicative
recovery11597NNrecovery
possibility11598NNpossibility
.11599SENT.
It11600PPit
...11601:...
there11602EXthere
is11603VBZbe
...11604:...
we11605PPwe
never11606RBnever
heard11607VVDhear
any11608DTany
suggestion11609NNsuggestion
prior11610RBprior
to11611TOto
the11612DTthe
Respondents11613NNSrespondent
'11614POS'
merits11615NNSmerit
brief11616JJbrief
about11617INabout
potential11618JJpotential
lost11619VVNlose
profits11620NNSprofit
claims11621NNSclaim
based11622VVNbase
upon11623INupon
monopsony11624NNmonopsony
.11625SENT.
To11626TOTo
the11627DTthe
contrary11628NNcontrary
,11629,,
the11630DTthe
theory11631NNtheory
throughout11632INthroughout
the11633DTthe
life11634NNlife
of11635INof
this11636DTthis
case11637NNcase
is11638VBZbe
that11639DTthat
...11640:...
that11641IN/thatthat
developers11642NNSdeveloper
,11643,,
if11644INif
they11645PPthey
sued11646VVDsue
,11647,,
would11648MDwould
sue11649VVsue
over11650INover
the11651DTthe
same11652JJsame
3011653CD@card@
percent11654NNpercent
markup11655NNmarkup
.11656SENT.
The11657DTthe
brief11658NNbrief
in11659INin
opposition11660NNopposition
at11661INat
1211662CD@card@
says11663VVZsay
any11664DTany
claim11665NNclaim
by11666INby
the11667DTthe
app11668NPApp
's11669POS's
developers11670NNSdeveloper
...11671:...
excuse11672VVexcuse
me11673PPme
...11674:...
a11675DTa
claim11676NNclaim
by11677INby
the11678DTthe
app11679NPApp
's11680POS's
developers11681NNSdeveloper
,11682,,
even11683RBeven
if11684INif
they11685PPthey
had11686VHDhave
one11687CDone
,11688,,
would11689MDwould
not11690RBnot
overlap11691VVoverlap
the11692DTthe
3011693CD@card@
percent11694NNpercent
markup11695NNmarkup
paid11696VVNpay
by11697INby
app11698NPApp
's11699POS's
purchasers11700NNSpurchaser
.11701SENT.
Rather11702RBrather
,11703,,
it11704PPit
is11705VBZbe
a11706DTa
piece11707NNpiece
of11708INof
the11709DTthe
same11710JJsame
percent11711NNpercent
pie11712NNpie
.11713SENT.
So11714RBso
going11715VVGgo
back11716RBback
to11717TOto
what11718WPwhat
is11719VBZbe
Illinois11720NPIllinois
Brick11721NPBrick
about11722RBabout
,11723,,
it11724PPit
is11725VBZbe
about11726INabout
not11727RBnot
having11728VHGhave
that11729DTthat
apportionment11730NNapportionment
fight11731NNfight
.11732SENT.
They11733PPthey
admitted11734VVDadmit
to11735TOto
the11736DTthe
...11737:...
to11738TOto
the11739DTthe
time11740NNtime
that11741IN/thatthat
this11742DTthis
case11743NNcase
was11744VBDbe
on11745INon
this11746DTthis
Court11747NPCourt
's11748POS's
doorstep11749NNdoorstep
that11750IN/thatthat
this11751DTthis
is11752VBZbe
all11753RBall
about11754INabout
an11755DTan
apportionment11756NNapportionment
fight11757NNfight
between11758INbetween
the11759DTthe
developers11760NNSdeveloper
.11761SENT.
As11762RBas
...11763:...
as11764RBas
to11765TOto
the11766DTthe
...11767:...
the11768DTthe
...11769:...
the11770DTthe
...11771:...
which11772WDTwhich
is11773VBZbe
the11774DTthe
better11775JJRgood
rule11776NNrule
,11777,,
the11778DTthe
formalistic11779JJformalistic
rule11780NNrule
or11781CCor
the11782DTthe
substantive11783JJsubstantive
rule11784NNrule
,11785,,
I11786PPI
suggest11787VVPsuggest
that11788DTthat
...11789:...
that11790IN/thatthat
the11791DTthe
formalistic11792JJformalistic
rule11793NNrule
is11794VBZbe
always11795RBalways
the11796DTthe
one11797CDone
that11798WDTthat
is11799VBZbe
most11800RBSmost
subject11801JJsubject
to11802TOto
manipulation11803NNmanipulation
.11804SENT.
The11805DTthe
substantive11806JJsubstantive
rule11807NNrule
that11808WDTthat
asks11809VVZask
is11810VBZbe
your11811PP$your
damages11812NNSdamage
theory11813NNtheory
a11814DTa
pass-on11815NNpass-on
theory11816NNtheory
focuses11817VVZfocus
on11818INon
what11819WPwhat
is11820VBZbe
of11821INof
economic11822JJeconomic
substance11823NNsubstance
.11824SENT.
And11825CCand
,11826,,
here11827RBhere
,11828,,
that11829WDTthat
's11830VBZbe
what11831WPwhat
the11832DTthe
district11833NNdistrict
court11834NNcourt
judge11835NNjudge
did11836VVDdo
.11837SENT.
In11838RBin
...11839:...
in11840INin
a11841DTa
patient11842NNpatient
but11843CCbut
persistent11844JJpersistent
manner11845NNmanner
,11846,,
she11847PPshe
required11848VVDrequire
them11849PPthem
to11850TOto
say11851VVsay
what11852WPwhat
is11853VBZbe
your11854PP$your
theory11855NNtheory
.11856SENT.
And11857CCand
it11858PPit
...11859:...
and11860CCand
at11861INat
JA11862NPJa
13711863CD@card@
to11864TOto
14311865CD@card@
,11866,,
you11867PPyou
see11868VVPsee
the11869DTthe
transcript11870NNtranscript
of11871INof
the11872DTthe
district11873NNdistrict
court11874NNcourt
argument11875NNargument
when11876WRBwhen
...11877:...
when11878WRBwhen
,11879,,
finally11880RBfinally
,11881,,
at11882INat
JA11883NPJa
14111884CD@card@
,11885,,
they11886PPthey
said11887VVDsay
...11888:...
or11889CCor
14311890CD@card@
,11891,,
rather11892RBrather
...11893:...
they11894PPthey
said11895VVDsay
their11896PP$their
theory11897NNtheory
is11898VBZbe
that11899IN/thatthat
,11900,,
because11901INbecause
of11902INof
the11903DTthe
commission11904NNcommission
,11905,,
the11906DTthe
developer11907NNdeveloper
would11908MDwould
mark11909VVmark
up11910RPup
the11911DTthe
app11912NPApp
.11913SENT.
That11914DTthat
is11915VBZbe
a11916DTa
classic11917JJclassic
over-charge11918NNover-charge
case11919NNcase
.11920SENT.
Now11921RBnow
,11922,,
to11923TOto
be11924VBbe
sure11925JJsure
,11926,,
in11927INin
a11928DTa
new11929JJnew
setting11930NNsetting
,11931,,
it11932PPit
's11933VBZbe
a11934DTa
new11935JJnew
world11936NNworld
setting11937NNsetting
.11938SENT.
It11939PPit
's11940VBZbe
not11941RBnot
the11942DTthe
brick-and-mortar11943NPbrick-and-mortar
setting11944NNsetting
of11945INof
the11946DTthe
three11947CDthree
cases11948NNScase
that11949IN/thatthat
this11950DTthis
case11951NNcase
...11952:...
that11953IN/thatthat
this11954DTthis
Court11955NPCourt
has11956VHZhave
decided11957VVNdecide
before11958RBbefore
.11959SENT.
But11960CCbut
it11961PPit
is11962VBZbe
the11963DTthe
same11964JJsame
economics11965NNSeconomics
that11966WDTthat
should11967MDshould
have11968VHhave
the11969DTthe
same11970JJsame
outcome11971NNoutcome
prohibiting11972VVGprohibit
pass-through11973JJpass-through
damages11974NNSdamage
claims11975NNSclaim
.11976SENT.
[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]11977LOC[CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS]
Thank11978VVthank
you11979PPyou
,11980,,
counsel11981NNcounsel
.11982SENT.
The11983DTthe
case11984NNcase
is11985VBZbe
submitted11986VVNsubmit
.11987SENT.