The DOJ lawsuit is 88 pages long, and I freely confess I haven’t yet finished reading it, but it seems one tech writer has – finding a claim that CarPlay is anticompetitive.

As the piece notes, it seems clear that the Department of Justice doesn’t actually understand what CarPlay is, or how it works, as the claim simply makes no sense …

The Verge’s Andrew Hawkins spotted the reference.

The DOJ says that, like smartphones, vehicle infotainment systems have become a new way in which Apple exhibits anticompetitive behavior to harm consumers as well as its competitors.

Apple’s plans to introduce a more immersive version of CarPlay, in which the system displays key aspects of the vehicle’s functions like speed and HVAC, are further evidence of the company’s illegal monopoly over smartphones, prosecutors say.

“By applying the same playbook of restrictions to CarPlay, Apple further locks-in the power of the iPhone by preventing the development of other disintermediating technologies that interoperate with the phone but reside off device,” the lawsuit says.

The first part of the misunderstanding is that there is a lock-in. There is none. Anyone getting into their car which supports CarPlay and Android Auto has three options:

• Connect an iPhone, and get CarPlay on the car’s display
• Connect an Android smartphone, and get Android Auto on the display
• Do neither of these things, and use the car’s own infotainment system

Making any one of these choices doesn’t stop you changing your mind in the future. An iPhone owner can switch to an Android phone and immediately switch from CarPlay to Android Auto.

Similarly with the new instrument cluster feature in iOS 17.4. Car makers can choose whether or not to support it (and so far, very few do), and car owners can choose whether or not to enable it.

As with standard CarPlay, there is no compulsion, and no lock-in.

Where the DOJ is potentially on safer ground is its related complaint that Apple restricts the Car Key feature – in which an iPhone or Apple Watch can hold a digital copy of the car key – to its own Wallet app. Car makers don’t have the option of enabling the feature in their own app but not in Wallet.

Prosecutors use the example of Apple requiring developers to add digital keys developed for their own apps to Apple Wallet in order to function.

“The default status of Apple Wallet steers users to the Apple Wallet rather than allowing third parties to present digital car keys only in their own cross-platform app, increasing dependence on Apple and the iPhone whenever they use their car,” the complaint reads.

Even here, however, that arguably harms car makers, but it’s a stretch to claim that it harms consumers.

The DOJ lawsuit is 88 pages long, and I freely confess I haven’t yet finished reading it, but it seems one tech writer has – finding a claim that CarPlay is anticompetitive.

As the piece notes, it seems clear that the Department of Justice doesn’t actually understand what CarPlay is, or how it works, as the claim simply makes no sense …

The Verge’s Andrew Hawkins spotted the reference.

The DOJ says that, like smartphones, vehicle infotainment systems have become a new way in which Apple exhibits anticompetitive behavior to harm consumers as well as its competitors.

Apple’s plans to introduce a more immersive version of CarPlay, in which the system displays key aspects of the vehicle’s functions like speed and HVAC, are further evidence of the company’s illegal monopoly over smartphones, prosecutors say.

“By applying the same playbook of restrictions to CarPlay, Apple further locks-in the power of the iPhone by preventing the development of other disintermediating technologies that interoperate with the phone but reside off device,” the lawsuit says.

The first part of the misunderstanding is that there is a lock-in. There is none. Anyone getting into their car which supports CarPlay and Android Auto has three options:

• Connect an iPhone, and get CarPlay on the car’s display
• Connect an Android smartphone, and get Android Auto on the display
• Do neither of these things, and use the car’s own infotainment system

Making any one of these choices doesn’t stop you changing your mind in the future. An iPhone owner can switch to an Android phone and immediately switch from CarPlay to Android Auto.

Similarly with the new instrument cluster feature in iOS 17.4. Car makers can choose whether or not to support it (and so far, very few do), and car owners can choose whether or not to enable it.

As with standard CarPlay, there is no compulsion, and no lock-in.

Where the DOJ is potentially on safer ground is its related complaint that Apple restricts the Car Key feature – in which an iPhone or Apple Watch can hold a digital copy of the car key – to its own Wallet app. Car makers don’t have the option of enabling the feature in their own app but not in Wallet.

Prosecutors use the example of Apple requiring developers to add digital keys developed for their own apps to Apple Wallet in order to function.

“The default status of Apple Wallet steers users to the Apple Wallet rather than allowing third parties to present digital car keys only in their own cross-platform app, increasing dependence on Apple and the iPhone whenever they use their car,” the complaint reads.

Even here, however, that arguably harms car makers, but it’s a stretch to claim that it harms consumers.