Thank you for your helpful response selectodude! In that case perhaps I should apply there, can I list you as my reference?

That answers my question, thanks for supplying the case reference.

EDIT: Actually I don't understand how this case applies... The key passage seems to be:

"We conclude that cellophane's interchangeability with the other materials mentioned suffices to make it a part of this flexible packaging material market."

My point is that there is no interchangeability between ios apps and android apps. Customers tend to have either ios or android and aren't able to freely choose between the two. What am I missing?

> Epic's exceptional powerhouse firm, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, was not as well versed in law as you are.

Well, they lost, didn’t they? So their argument wasn’t that compelling, and it wasn’t that clear cut in their favour at the very least.

Let's not let that get in the way of a snippy sarcastic comment though... ;)