And could someone please explain where there's an expectation of equal access and right to appear with a certain preference in a closed app store's search results? Or not to have your app's functionality copied by anyone else?
What’s not fair is to completely disengage from someone’s area of reasoning to pick a more favorable ground. I see this all the time.
“This is immoral!” “Who cares? It’s legal.”
“This is illegal!” “Who cares? Take your business elsewhere.”
“These are terrible business terms!” “Who cares? It’s moral.”
Applications stores are public markets and should be regulated as such.
Apple wants to have its cake and eat it to (have a non-neutral platform that favors only them while implying the platform is neutral to their money cows).
It's no different than Standard Oil giving itself preferential shipment prices on the rails. This is text-book anti-competitive behavior.
So yes, in a regulated environment where monopolistic tactics are supposed to be verboten, we are supposed to have a right to at least be on equal standing with Apple's own apps.
Starbucks coffee shops give preferential treatment to Starbucks products, and not to others. Can you claim a similar right to have access to sell your goods through their stores?
You're also moving the goal post. This particular issue isn't about access to the store at all, it's about Apple giving itself preferential treatment.
When does the thing someone created become a public good with rights to equal access?