Apple's App Store, Safari, and iOS Officially Designated 'Gatekeepers' in EU

[AndiG]

Would be interesting to see Microsoft/Google/Apple as a group just decide to leave the EU.

Imagine all those services going dark overnight. Obviously this isn’t going to happen, but I wonder if the EU really has all the leverage they think they do. What would be the breaking point where these companies would abandon Europe because regulations become too encumbering.

Well, maybe think again.

Microsoft/Google/Apple obey because they fear a 10% penalty (and 20% the second time). Try to calculate the loss if these companies would leave the EU.

Look up the term shareholder value and think again. Would the companies lose their own money or would it be the shareholders' money? Could the shareholders sue them for losing money?

Maybe there's a reason these companies don't hire people with such great ideas ...

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Would be interesting to see Microsoft/Google/Apple as a group just decide to leave the EU.

Imagine all those services going dark overnight. Obviously this isn’t going to happen, but I wonder if the EU really has all the leverage they think they do. What would be the breaking point where these companies would abandon Europe because regulations become too encumbering.

Microsoft is complying with regulations though. Why would they leave when they made changes to comply with the DMA long before the changes even went in effect?

 

[mox358]

Yes, it will not happen


and that's why the EU has all the leverage.

The business model of US tech companies depends on the economy of scale. It is not possible anymore to ignore a market as large as the EU. Even the French market is large enough that it justified Apple to make a special version of the iPhone 12 (?) including EarPods - just for the French market.

But that’s the leverage I’m talking about. Think of it like a union strike. How long could the EU hold out with no Google search, no Google Play, no WhatsApp, no App Store etc? I don’t know of any European tech companies, especially ones who are capable to jump in and replace the big three so quickly.

 

[DanTheMan827]

Imagine if we had a functioning United States government that would have made it clear to the EU that such measures would be met with harsh retaliation.

EU GDP in 2008 was 16.3 trillion. In 2022 it was 16.64 trillion. You’d think maybe someone over there could figure out things aren’t working.

Don’t worry, I’m sure more regulations will fix it.

If we had a functioning United States, we would also have laws like this, but antitrust enforcement has been a joke since Bush.

The two parties are so diametrically opposed to one another that nothing actually gets done.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Would be interesting to see Microsoft/Google/Apple as a group just decide to leave the EU.

Imagine all those services going dark overnight. Obviously this isn’t going to happen, but I wonder if the EU really has all the leverage they think they do. What would be the breaking point where these companies would abandon Europe because regulations become too encumbering.

Said companies could get sued out of existence by their shareholders for pulling such a move; less revenue vs zero revenue. Not individual shareholders, but mutaul funds, investment banks, investment firms, etc.

It's not an option.

 

[AndiG]

Said companies could get sued out of existence by their shareholders for pulling such a move; less revenue vs zero revenue. Not individual shareholders, but mutaul funds, investment banks, investment firms, etc.

It's not an option.

Really glad at least someone understands shareholder value here at MR forums.

 

[gnipgnop]

This is an oft-ignored truth. When tax rates were lowered, tax revenue increased, 100% true and verifiable. The problem is that government spent more.

That's like saying you can pay off your debt faster by losing your job. Tax cuts don't increase tax revenue because they are a very weak form of economic stimulus. For every dollar assigned to a tax cut only a percentage of that dollar will actually be spent back into the economy.

Example: when the Trump tax cuts were announced there were business leaders that claimed they would be using the money to increase wages and build out infrastructure for their business. Those uses could actually increase tax revenue because they are economically stimulative. But the reality is that the majority of the cuts for corporations were either used for profit (money not spent into the economy) or for stock buybacks (also money not spent into the economy). If the money is not primarily being spent back into the economy then you can't claim it's increasing revenue through economic growth. That should be obvious.

 

[ashdelacroix]

I'm a fan of organic, iterated laws that can remain dynamic in line with industry and innovation.

The key problem with the EU is that they have to get a substantial amount of international and multiple institutional consensus at every stage of lawmaking, meaning there is a tendency to come up with huge frameworks and lengthy and onerous thousand-page laws that can eventually, after years, be signed off by all members, rather than trying to bring in 'smaller' laws over time.

This is why the EU can seem very hard-hitting: they are trying to be future proof, they are trying to cover every conceivable angle, because they know that adjusting these laws is very difficult because it would require so much consensus to change them. This is the downside to supranational organisations: they lack a certain lightness of touch.

 

[Abazigal]

Third party app stores can be managed by simply charging developers the same 30% cut regardless of where their app is sold.

Somehow, I don’t think it will end up being a huge deal for Apple.

 

[Zest28]

Imagine if we had a functioning United States government that would have made it clear to the EU that such measures would be met with harsh retaliation.

EU GDP in 2008 was 16.3 trillion. In 2022 it was 16.64 trillion. You’d think maybe someone over there could figure out things aren’t working.

Don’t worry, I’m sure more regulations will fix it.

Trump would never accept this from the EU.

 

[BaldiMac]

My guy sideloaded apps are still sandboxed

Sure. Unless they find a way to bypass the sandbox. The benefit of the iOS security model is the addition of App Store review to the technical security measures.

That does not make it okay to limit app distribution, as the Mac has proven that you can still have a secure operating system while still allowing users to install whatever they wanted.

Mac hasn't "proven" anything of the sort. iOS is more secure than the Mac while being used by far more people and far more developers.

On iOS you are limited to only apps through Apple's App Store. That is a monopoly on app distribution.

Every store has a monopoly on sales through their own store.

Apple does not have a monopoly on mobile OSs, they have a duopoly with Google.

Nope. Android OSs are controlled by the manufacturers, not Google. Chrome and Brave are competitors even though the are based on the same open source project.

But to reiterate my point, I'd like to harken back in time to the late 90s with the end of the DotCom Bubble with Microsoft being sued by the FTC for antitrust regarding web browsers on Windows 95 and 98. On Windows, Microsoft made it nay impossible to have other web browsers, that you had to go through Internet Explorer, as Microsoft had a monopoly on web engines on their OS as determined through case law in United States of America vs Microsoft. You didn't hear anyone say "well just use NeXTSTEP or Mac OS 8, you're not forced to use Windows 95." No, they cracked down on Microsoft over this, and if they didn't we would not have other web browsers like FireFox or Chrome.

The Microsoft case had little to do with Apple's current situation. They had 95% market share and were literally paying their partners to limit competition. Apple has 30% or so share in the EU.

This is an oft-ignored truth. When tax rates were lowered, tax revenue increased, 100% true and verifiable. The problem is that government spent more.

Tax revenue increased despite the tax cuts, not becuase of them. Tax revenue would have increased more without the tax cuts. Feel free to source if you believe otherwise. Here's the link I posted earlier with estimates of up to $2 trillion in excess debt as a result of the 2018 tax cuts.

How did the TCJA affect the federal budget outlook?

www.taxpolicycenter.org

 

[MLVC]

But that’s the leverage I’m talking about. Think of it like a union strike. How long could the EU hold out with no Google search, no Google Play, no WhatsApp, no App Store etc? I don’t know of any European tech companies, especially ones who are capable to jump in and replace the big three so quickly.

That would be disastrous for the companies involved, as the anger of the EU public would be directed against those companies and not the EU, politicians would probably draw an ever harder line, shareholders would sue those companies, and it might well lead to worsening relations between the US and the EU, leading to geo-political consequences.

So yeah, that will never happen.

 

[FriendlyMackle]

Europe continues to be over ridiculous. Nothing new for thousands of years here.

I guess you’ve never heard of the Renaissance, The Enlightenment, or any of the literature, science, medicine, technology, arts, poetry, music, dance of the past 500 years??? Not sure where YOU are located, but the overwhelming majority of people in the Western Hemisphere came here from Europe within the past 500 years. Not discounting the people who were already here in the Americas.

 

[MLVC]

I guess you’ve never heard of the Renaissance, The Enlightenment, or any of the literature, science, medicine, technology, arts, poetry, music, dance of the past 500 years??? Not sure where YOU are located, but the overwhelming majority of people in the Western Hemisphere came here from Europe within the past 500 years. Not discounting the people who were already here in the Americas.

He probably calls himself "German", or "Swedish" or something like that while having never set foot in either of those countries 😂

 

[Zest28]

That's like saying you can pay off your debt faster by losing your job. Tax cuts don't increase tax revenue because they are a very weak form of economic stimulus. For every dollar assigned to a tax cut only a percentage of that dollar will actually be spent back into the economy.

Example: when the Trump tax cuts were announced there were business leaders that claimed they would be using the money to increase wages and build out infrastructure for their business. Those uses could actually increase tax revenue because they are economically stimulative. But the reality is that the majority of the cuts for corporations were either used for profit (money not spent into the economy) or for stock buybacks (also money not spent into the economy). If the money is not primarily being spent back into the economy then you can't claim it's increasing revenue through economic growth. That should be obvious.

Please, who do you think is better with spending money? Businesses or the government?

That is why tax cuts work.

 

[BuffaloTF]

On iOS you are limited to only apps through Apple's App Store. That is a monopoly on app distribution. Apple does not have a monopoly on mobile OSs, they have a duopoly with Google. If there were other mobile OSs besides just iOS and Android you would be right, the App Store wouldn't consist a monopoly in app distribution as iOS would be just one OS among others. However the wild west of smartphones has long ended, in many countries like Japan iOS has overwhelming dominance.

But to reiterate my point, I'd like to harken back in time to the late 90s with the end of the DotCom Bubble with Microsoft being sued by the FTC for antitrust regarding web browsers on Windows 95 and 98. On Windows, Microsoft made it nay impossible to have other web browsers, that you had to go through Internet Explorer, as Microsoft had a monopoly on web engines on their OS as determined through case law in United States of America vs Microsoft. You didn't hear anyone say "well just use NeXTSTEP or Mac OS 8, you're not forced to use Windows 95." No, they cracked down on Microsoft over this, and if they didn't we would not have other web browsers like FireFox or Chrome.

Since we’re discussing US laws and US v Microsoft. Let’s remember an important fact here - the US lost the case.

And since we’re saying “controlling app delivery” is a monopoly. Let’s remember the important fact it’s literal established case law that it is not, as you cannot have a monopoly on your own product as determined in Elliott v United Center.

It was ruled that the United Center, more specifically “food sales within the United Center” does not describe a relevant market and does not threaten any other food sellers in the geographical area. It was ruled that the United Center can have reasons and enact business rules to prevent certain kinds of foods, cans, bottles, alcohol, all in the interest of maintaining order in the facility. People don’t go to the United Center to buy food, they go for an event; and they can recoup the cost of putting on the event in any number of ways. Why? Because the relevant market is ALL places that sell food. ALL places you can go watch a sporting event.

I’d recommend reading that ruling in full.

 

[Ctrlos]

I think you have a point about it being a healthier system. Of course, that’s the system that the US is actually supposed to have. The federal government has gotten completely out of control and gone beyond its areas of responsibility. It’s a larger topic, but to tie it back to this thread, I’m not sure this is an example of the EU system working. If level of control, or things like “gatekeeper” status, are decided by marketshare/power, how can you make a one-size-fits-all solution to a collection of countries that may experience different realities.

America has crushing debt because the federal government decides to spend more than it takes in. If it raised taxes on the rich (who already pay the vast majority of taxes), it would just spend more, not balance the budget. And if taxes were raised on the non-rich, people would actually start asking why the government is spending so much and what they’re spending it on…that’s what the government is really afraid of.

Again, to tie it back to the topic at hand, this just feels like another example of government making a decision because it sounds good, but not wanting to deal with the consequences. We may or may not see negative results from these policies, but you can be sure that if we see negative results, the government won’t take responsibility for them. Kind of like how they don’t balance their books, and then they blame everyone else for it. Very much like how people are complaining because Apple may limit data transfer and transfer speeds on the USB-C iPhones. USB-C does not require Thunderbolt-level speeds. There is nothing illegal about Apple implementing a lower speed-threshold, as long as it‘s USB-C (in the context of these new laws). But the lawmakers probably don’t even understand the overlap and distinctions between USB-C, Thunderbolt, USB 4, etc. now that they get a result they don’t want, they will attack Apple.

There’s a lot of talk over here as well about reigning in government spending but commentary fails to take into account that it costs a lot of money to fund a nation-state in the 21st Century.

But the biggest problem is the centralisation of government. The only way to cut national spending is to decentralise power back to local authorities so that they keep a lid on their taxes. In the UK that would mean a ‘Heptarchy Act’ where we become more like Switzerland and in the USA it would mean breaking the country up into much smaller ones.

 

[BuffaloTF]

This is an oft-ignored truth. When tax rates were lowered, tax revenue increased, 100% true and verifiable. The problem is that government spent more.

To tie it back to this thread, it’s another example of government making policy because of optics, because of how people will perceive the action. The irony is that many people “perceive” that the government takes in less money when taxes are lowered, even though the reality is the opposite. By the same token, many people may “perceive” that government is virtuously battling for the consumer, but they may just be entrenching and expanding their own power, for their own purposes. I see much of that in the EU’s approach to Apple these days.

It’s 100% false and very verifiable. Tax receipts were lower after, bottoming out and flatlining during the 2020 pandemic. Since the 2020 CARES Act, which allowed companies to use current year losses to lower last year taxes, and project out revenues to a future year… coupled with our booming economy which is at a 30 year high… revenues are up. It’s the economy, not the tax cut. It’s the massive public investment in new funds adding some 5 trillion dollars into spending.

 

[neuropsychguy]

America has the highest levels of poverty in the western world.

That's interesting because these data suggest otherwise: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/poverty-rate-by-country

There are several Western world countries with higher poverty rates than the U.S. including Spain, the U.K., Italy, and more. Most of the others aren't that different from the U.S. with rates of poverty. Also, people who fall in the poverty level in the U.S. have social and medical safety nets similar to what's available in other "western" countries for most citizens.

 

[OneBar]

America has high levels of debt due to the Bush tax cuts, invasion/occupation of Afghanistan, invasion/occupation of Iraq, the Great Recession and the Trump tax cuts. Debt levels were decreasing in 2000 and would have continued to decrease otherwise.

Taxing me less does not drive national debt up. The 2 are not linked in that manner. If I have more money to spend, then the governments, local and federal, have more sales tax which nets them more than income tax ever will. Don't forget, only 48% of our population pays income taxes. EVERYONE pays sales tax, though.

 

[Glideslope]

Just to be clear, Europe and the EU are not the same thing.

This will become even more fractured once France makes its move and joins BRICS.

 

[jz0309]

I read another article that lists a total of 22 services that are official gatekeepers for the EU - the funny thing is, none are from the EU, mostly US and then China (TikTok).
Rather than enabling EU to become innovators, they introduce hurdles for others - it's the typical EU political crap

 

[JamesHolden]

Nope. We just believe in freedom.

Freedumb maybe.

 

[jz0309]

I think if I was subject to the EU, I'd be a little annoyed that they were concerned about a phone browser rather than taking steps to address the stagnant, rapidly falling behind economies of the member states.

yup, you're absolutely correct, they are great at creating bureaucratic measures to ensure the governments have never ending funds and protect themselves and not the people who vote for them ...

 

[JamesHolden]

Notice how none of those bullet points have anything to do with consumers.

You need to work on your reading comprehension.