Apple CEO Tim Cook to Meet EU Antitrust Chief Next Week

[H2SO4]

Well he is kind of right. EU don’t care about consumers in that regard, they value the market and competition.

If a consumer is harmed isn’t often that relevant if the harm to the market is greater.

Example the fact that consumers might be harmed with the opening of the AppStore is completely irrelevant to the EU because the harm is greater to the market by preventing developers the ability to compete on fair terms with apples provided services and ability to sell to consumers without Apple interfering etc.

Also kind of wrong.
Not sure where you get EU don't care about consumers from. Are you a Brexiteer?
(If not you should be).

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Also kind of wrong.
Not sure where you get EU don't care about consumers from. Are you a Brexiteer?
(If not you should be).

Om from Sweden and very Pro EU. You are free to read the legal legislations.

the EU takes in to consideration multiple stakeholders. If the option is between consumer benefits and market competition being harmed, then EU will protect the market irrespective of the harm to the consumer. Because the possibility of having a choice is deemed more important.

 

[Abazigal]

Make whatever argument you want, you're entitled to. Increased POV is good for everybody but your original statement, (to me), seems like you've either forgotten or ignored, (deliberately or otherwise), what the point of the law is.

I understand the point of the law. When even Spotify is exempt from it despite its huge user base, it's apparent that this is just blatant protectionism by another name. Not least because the US has all this massive tech giants, while the EU has none.

I don't say this in criticism of people living in the EU; they have ultimately chosen different values and priorities. As an individual, who wouldn't prefer better work-life balance and benefits? But as a culture, it's not hard to see how this safety net results in a lower propensity to innovate and take risks compared to countries like the US, where entrepreneurs generally have less to lose.

Like I said - there is good in bad, there is bad in good.

And the more the EU attempts to level the playing field by introducing all these legislation and regulations, the more they will just end falling behind. It's the equivalent of realising that you are the slowest runner on the track, and instead of training to run faster, you choose to introduce a new rule that prevents all the other competitors from running faster than the slowest participant on the field.

And who knows, maybe one day, nobody bothers to show up to your track to compete with you anymore.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I understand the point of the law. When even Spotify is exempt from it despite its huge user base, it's apparent that this is just blatant protectionism by another name. Not least because the US has all this massive tech giants, while the EU has none.

I don't say this in criticism of people living in the EU; they have ultimately chosen different values and priorities. As an individual, who wouldn't prefer better work-life balance and benefits? But as a culture, it's not hard to see how this safety net results in a lower propensity to innovate and take risks compared to countries like the US, where entrepreneurs generally have less to lose.

Like I said - there is good in bad, there is bad in good.

And the more the EU attempts to level the playing field by introducing all these legislation and regulations, the more they will just end falling behind. It's the equivalent of realising that you are the slowest runner on the track, and instead of training to run faster, you choose to introduce a new rule that prevents all the other competitors from running faster than the slowest participant on the field.

And who knows, maybe one day, nobody bothers to show up to your track to compete with you anymore.

Spotify isn’t Excempted. Can you demonstrate in what way they fall within the scope of the DMA?

Something being a tech giant isn’t providing any value statement in of itself. Especially when ASML and ASP is key technologies for all the top 10 companies listed. There’s a reason why USA doesn’t have any development in lithography technology.

USA specializes in consumer goods, and Europe specializes more in technology and goods that is needed by corporations that manufactures consumer goods, especially in stable long term growth instead of short term rapid growth that we see as unsustainable and unhealthy, but as you said us companies like to do more risks and that’s fine.

Eu isn’t leveling the playing field, they just make sure competition isn’t prevented by artificial restraints.

 

[Abazigal]

Spotify isn’t Excempted. Can you demonstrate in what way they fall within the scope of the DMA?

That's the point - Spotify isn't, because it doesn't meet the criteria necessary to be designated a core platform service provider. And I don't think it's a coincidence that the rules set forth by the EU have been so specifically carved out that they end up only applying to US and Chinese corporations and not their own.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I understand the point of the law. When even Spotify is exempt from it despite its huge user base, it's apparent that this is just blatant protectionism by another name. Not least because the US has all this massive tech giants, while the EU has none.

I don't say this in criticism of people living in the EU; they have ultimately chosen different values and priorities. As an individual, who wouldn't prefer better work-life balance and benefits? But as a culture, it's not hard to see how this safety net results in a lower propensity to innovate and take risks compared to countries like the US, where entrepreneurs generally have less to lose.

Like I said - there is good in bad, there is bad in good.

And the more the EU attempts to level the playing field by introducing all these legislation and regulations, the more they will just end falling behind. It's the equivalent of realising that you are the slowest runner on the track, and instead of training to run faster, you choose to introduce a new rule that prevents all the other competitors from running faster than the slowest participant on the field.

And one very important thing is the fact the USA and china are singular countries with singular regulatory frameworks. EU on the other hand is still 27 different countries.
ASML is a Dutch company, Spotify is a Swedish company, SAP is a German company, NOKIA is from Finland, T-Mobile is German, Aldi is German etc etc

EU must regulate everything in order for it to become a truly single market.

EU as an institution is barely 20 years old. The Euro as a currency was barely established and we still have 8 currencies in use in EU as having 24 official languages, of which three – English, French and German – have the higher status of "procedural" languages. It’s a miracle we can compete at all.

Especially when many of the the big Silicon Valley firms are older than EU by at least a decade or two

That's the point - Spotify isn't, because it doesn't meet the criteria necessary to be designated a core platform service provider. And I don't think it's a coincidence that the rules set forth by the EU have been so specifically carved out that they end up only applying to US and Chinese corporations and not their own.

Let’s play pretend, let’s assume Spotify have the user base, revenue, corporate users and have a clearly dominant market position.

What part of the DMA would even do anything? What core platform services would they have?

Could it just be the behavior of the mega international companies are doing unique behaviors that is largely already illegal by law in EU and therefore not likely to be practiced in the first place? Hence why these big companies are hit by ex ante regulation( before harm is done) instead of expost laws(after harm is done)?

 

[BigDO]

Excellent. Keep the megacorps honest and truly socially responsible.

 

[iPadified]

I understand the point of the law. When even Spotify is exempt from it despite its huge user base, it's apparent that this is just blatant protectionism by another name. Not least because the US has all this massive tech giants, while the EU has none.

I don't say this in criticism of people living in the EU; they have ultimately chosen different values and priorities. As an individual, who wouldn't prefer better work-life balance and benefits? But as a culture, it's not hard to see how this safety net results in a lower propensity to innovate and take risks compared to countries like the US, where entrepreneurs generally have less to lose.

Like I said - there is good in bad, there is bad in good.

And the more the EU attempts to level the playing field by introducing all these legislation and regulations, the more they will just end falling behind. It's the equivalent of realising that you are the slowest runner on the track, and instead of training to run faster, you choose to introduce a new rule that prevents all the other competitors from running faster than the slowest participant on the field.

And who knows, maybe one day, nobody bothers to show up to your track to compete with you anymore.

You have a very limited view on what tech is. There is green tech, pharma tech, lithography tech, food tech, and a lot more. If you think USA is leader in everything, think again. It is better to trade than to try to be leader in everything.

 

[timber]

In reality a Brit that is out of the EU is a misnomer. We are now feeling the reality of the insignificant little country we have been revealed to be.

Scrabbling for crappy trade deals.
Not having our standards taken seriously, (UK CA).
STILL having to abide by EU rules due to the insignificance of our position as we want to sell into their market and go there on holiday but now without having a seat at the table to influence those decisions.

All for what? If Tim Cook defers to the EU there is NO WAY IN h3ll that he'll make a special product just for us. Man we're stupid.

Every other European country more or less deep down understands how irrelevant would they be alone. Even France or Germany. They know perfectly well that the EU not only makes them relevant but amplifies their voice.
And it's not like your standards aren't taken seriously, they just aren't our standards. If you come up with something interesting and innovative we will incorporate it.

 

[H2SO4]

Every other European country more or less deep down understands how irrelevant would they be alone. Even France or Germany. They know perfectly well that the EU not only makes them relevant but amplifies their voice.
And it's not like your standards aren't taken seriously, they just aren't our standards. If you come up with something interesting and innovative we will incorporate it.

That's an interesting and probably correct take on things.
But we have too many little Englanders that will prevent that. British Exceptionalism they call it.
Everybody has their own POV and is entitled to it however;
A lot of Brexiteers I speak to cannot name anything that is better. Not a single thing.
To the ones that can, I simply ask is that one item, (it's never more than one - immigration), worth all of this. None say yes quickly. Most will go silent and the ones that do say yes, take a while to say it.
James O'Brien made an absolute mockery of most of them.

But to us, I suppose our corruption is better than your corruption? (I don't mean this as an insult).

 

[gsurf123]

FaceTime and iMessage (not mentioned here) are Apple proprietary creations and are product differentiators. For big a company to open these up is straight IP theft. Why innovate if the government will effectively “open-source” it for you.

I’m just waiting for a body like the EU to declare Starlink a “gatekeeper” of worldwide internet access because they have the only product that works nearly everywhere and levels the access playing field in places where cables will never be run.

 

[Dark_Omen]

Apple CEO Tim Cook will meet the European Union's antitrust chief, Margrethe Vestager, next week amid a series of disputes with the organization (via Reuters).

Vestager is also set to meet the chief executives of Alphabet, Broadcom, and Nvidia, as well as senior executives from OpenAI. The meetings will take place in San Francisco and Palo Alto on Thursday and Friday next week, and will focus on European competition policy and digital regulation.

In December, Apple reportedly floated the ability for Apple Pay rivals to access the iPhone's NFC technology for contactless payments in the EU. The offer is designed to settle an ongoing antitrust dispute and avoid a potential fine. The European Commission is believed to be seeking feedback from rivals and customers before accepting the offer, so it is highly likely that this matter will be discussed.

Apple is also facing several other challenges in the EU that will almost certainly be the subject of discussion, such as a $14 billion tax dispute. Most strikingly, new EU rules such as the Digital Markets Act (DMA) designate major tech companies as "gatekeepers" and compel them to open up their various services and platforms to other companies and developers. The DMA is expected to force Apple to make significant changes to the way the App Store, FaceTime, and Siri work in Europe. For example, Apple will next year be obliged to allow users to install third-party app stores and sideload apps, as well as give developers the ability to promote their offers outside the ‌‌‌App Store‌‌‌ and use third-party payment systems.

Article Link: Apple CEO Tim Cook to Meet EU Antitrust Chief Next Week

I mean if Cook would just use his head, half of these problems wouldn't exist.

1. It shouldn't have taken an act of legislation for Apple to move to the USB-C port on the iPhone -- especially since the iPad and Mac already moved to that port prior to the iPhone basically being forced to do so.
2. The side loaded apps thing I can understand --there should be no requirement to allow side loaded apps -- it's a security issue, which should be completely understandable. People are free to purchase any Android phone if they want to side load.
3. Not sure what's going on with FaceTime, but Apple should open up the app to other platforms. I don't see what the issue is here. Apple users want to be able to FaceTime with those on Windows and Android devices.
4. Not sure what's going on with Siri.
5. RCS should've been a no-brainer years ago, yet, Apple resisted it until finally caving.

 

[Dark_Omen]

.... Do we really want to just wait around for the American government to decide we deserve things like privacy laws and data portability?

Yes the EU goes too far, but American legislators go too far the other way. Look at the downright lies Elizabeth Warren is telling about Beeper Mini and Apple, somehow twisting it so that Apple is “blocking” Beeper’s services. I don’t think she’s stupid enough to actually believe that, which leaves lying as the most likely explanation.

...

The problem is, the majority of our politicians are far too old to understand or care about technology.

When people come to my cell phone store, most of them are the same age (or near it) as our politicians. They don't care or understand tech in the slightest.

So if they don't care or understand about tech, they probably won't understand its potential vulnerabilities. Heck, I think the government wants to spy on people and access their tech anyways, which is why the U.S government constantly complains that they can't have a back door into people's iPhones.

 

[CarAnalogy]

The problem is, the majority of our politicians are far too old to understand or care about technology.

When people come to my cell phone store, most of them are the same age (or near it) as our politicians. They don't care or understand tech in the slightest.

So if they don't care or understand about tech, they probably won't understand its potential vulnerabilities. Heck, I think the government wants to spy on people and access their tech anyways, which is why the U.S government constantly complains that they can't have a back door into people's iPhones.

Sure but again these people are supposed to have aids and advisors. It’s not possible for them to understand the hundreds of different fields they have to legislate about. But they’re supposed to hire smart advisors and listen to them. Whoever they are listening to about tech is telling them lies.

It’s ok for some random elderly person to be bad with technology. It is not ok when that elderly person has the power to set national technology policy.

Do we let people set national agricultural policy who don’t know anything about agriculture? Why not? Because food is important? Is technology not kind of important now too?

Sadly the answer to that is yes we do which is how Monsanto now controls our entire food supply.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Sure but again these people are supposed to have aids and advisors. It’s not possible for them to understand the hundreds of different fields they have to legislate about. But they’re supposed to hire smart advisors and listen to them. Whoever they are listening to about tech is telling them lies.

It’s ok for some random elderly person to be bad with technology. It is not ok when that elderly person has the power to set national technology policy.

Do we let people set national agricultural policy who don’t know anything about agriculture? Why not? Because food is important? Is technology not kind of important now too?

Sadly the answer to that is yes we do which is how Monsanto now controls our entire food supply.

That’s how EU works. The commission is made up by technocrats and experts who write and research the Tecnology in question. And tries to write legislation according to the political goals set out by parliament and the council.

While parliament is then debating and Voting on the issue instead of trying to write legislation for something they don’t grasp

 

[ForkHandles]

FaceTime and iMessage (not mentioned here) are Apple proprietary creations and are product differentiators. For big a company to open these up is straight IP theft. Why innovate if the government will effectively “open-source” it for you.

I’m just waiting for a body like the EU to declare Starlink a “gatekeeper” of worldwide internet access because they have the only product that works nearly everywhere and levels the access playing field in places where cables will never be run.

The EU aren’t requiring Apple to open up FaceTime and iMessage. I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick.

The issue is with the AppStore’s monopoly.