The trial court correctly dismissed the consumer plaintiff’s UCL unfair claim against Apple for its policies of taking a 30% cut of app developers’ earnings and prohibiting app developers from advertising alternative means of paying for app purchases.  Apple’s policies were unilaterally conceived and imposed, not by agreement with any other entity.  California’s Cartwright Act does not contain a monopolization prohibition, but instead merely bars agreements or conspiracies to restrain trade, mirroring Sherman Act section 1.  California decisions have adopted the Colgate doctrine (no antitrust liability for unilateral action) since 1979.  The Legislature’s inaction in the face of that long-standing categorical exemption from the antitrust laws is sufficient to create a safe harbor from UCL unfair prong claims.  In Cel-Tech, the Supreme Court held that safe harbors can arise not only when the Legislature enacts a statute expressly permitting conduct but also when the Legislature has “considered a situation and concluded no action should lie.”