EU Reportedly Planning to Charge Apple for Violating Digital Markets Act

[AppliedMicro]

MVNOs do not own the airwaves. They do not buy the airwaves. They rent spectrum

They don’t. They buy services at wholesale prices.
The analogy applicable as being one company being forced to open up their platform (network) for competitors.

To keep with the analogy if there were only one pizza restaurant the dma would mandate competitors can use the gas, ovens, electricity and materials of the one lone pizza place

Exactly - as they should be able to do.
Cause we want variety, consumer choice fair competition and competitive pricing in pizzas.

Regulation is of course only justified when one market participant controls and sets the terms for market access to all others. Which isn’t the case with pizzas. Last time I checked, a pizza oven wasn’t - but certainly readily available for purchase.

without paying any money to the owner.

They do pay money. Just as developers pay for their developer membership, and a core technology fee. And that’s not even mentioning all of the money derives from hardware sales made possible due ti their rich ecosystem of third-party apps.

 

[Melab]

It’s what the eu did with the dma. Gave away a slice of apple’s pie. Pun intended.

Stop being dishonest.

 

[I7guy]

They don’t. They buy services at wholesale prices.
The analogy applicable as being one company being forced to open up their platform (network) for competitors.

They do.

Exactly - as they should be able to do.
Cause we want variety, consumer choice fair competition and competitive pricing in pizzas.

That’s why the dma is crappy legislation.

Regulation is of course only justified when one market participant controls and sets the terms for market access to all others. Which isn’t the case with pizzas. Last time I checked, a pizza oven wasn’t - but certainly readily available for purchase.

Youre making a chicken and egg argument here.

They do pay money. Just as developers pay for their developer membership, and a core technology fee. And that’s not even mentioning all of the money derives from hardware sales made possible due ti their rich ecosystem of third-party apps.

No they don’t. They are using apples resources for free. Apple is trying with the ctf but who knows.

 

[I7guy]

Stop being dishonest.

Stop being disingenuous. You know exactly what the dma is attempting to do.

 

[webkit]

So there really isn’t anything in the US (other than the one infamous point) or anything in the EU with the App Store other than some regulations that force apple take certain actions with respect to their own property.

Apple has stopped engaging in anticompetitive behavior in the EU by allowing things like alternative iOS app stores and browser engines. Same is true in both the EU and U.S. regarding Apple's illegal anti-steering provisions.

Then there's the current DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple which is still in the early stages.

It’s about taking apples profits and giving it away for free. That is what it is about.

It's about opening up the iOS app marketplace to new competition from alternative app stores, payment systems, etc.

 

[I7guy]

Apple has stopped engaging in anticompetitive behavior in the EU by allowing things like alternative iOS app stores and browser engines. Same is true in both the EU and U.S. regarding Apple's illegal anti-steering provisions.

Apple didn’t engage in anticompetitive behavior in the first place, there is no proof only some unsupported opinions.

Then there's the current DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple which is still in the early stages.

So guilty? Right?

It's about opening up the iOS app marketplace to new competition from alternative app stores, payment systems, etc.

It’s about proof of anticompetitive behavior.

 

[webkit]

Apple didn’t engage in anticompetitive behavior in the first place, there is no proof only some unsupported opinions.

According to articles of the DMA, Apple was engaging in anticompetitive behavior and has also been charged with violating various provisions of the law.

So guilty? Right?

Reading comprehension issue? I said the lawsuit was in its early stages.

It’s about proof of anticompetitive behavior.

Which the EU had addressed and/or are currently addressing including charges against Apple for violating various provisions of the DMA.

 

[I7guy]

According to articles of the DMA, Apple was engaging in anticompetitive behavior and has also been charged with violating various provisions of the law.

They could say anything they wanted. It’s an opinion is all that is and then they threaded the needle to craft this gatekeeper nonsense.

Reading comprehension issue? I said the lawsuit was in its early stages.

Lack of due process understanding? Last I heard a lawsuit had to be won.

Which the EU had addressed and/or are currently addressing including charges against Apple for violating various provisions of the DMA.

If the legislation didn’t try to strip apple of its income it would have been far better for everybody.

 

[webkit]

They could say anything they wanted. It’s an opinion is all that is and then they threaded the needle to craft this gatekeeper nonsense.

It's not just "opinion", it’s formalized laws/regulations for the EU market. Apple can choose to follow the laws, face potential consequences, or exit the EU market.

Lack of due process understanding? Last I heard a lawsuit had to be won.

Yes, lawsuits have to be won. As I very clearly stated, the DOJ lawsuit against Apple is in its early stages.

If the legislation didn’t try to strip apple of its income it would have been far better for everybody.

Income gained through anticompetitive behavior is not income a company should have to begin with. App access restrictions by Apple, and to a lesser extent Google, unfairly stifled competition in those markets for years.

 

[I7guy]

It's not just "opinion", it’s formalized laws/regulations for the EU market. Apple can choose to follow the laws, face potential consequences, or exit the EU market.

It’s chicken and egg. They couldn’t craft this gatekeeper nonsense unless they said apple was acting anti-competitively. Anticompetitive means different things in different places. But the fact is was “declaration” says it all that it’s nonsense. Even through the ramifications are huge.

Yes, lawsuits have to be won. As I very clearly stated, the DOJ lawsuit against Apple is in its early stages.

Yes, I agree.

Income gained through anticompetitive behavior is not income a company should have to begin with.

If a company is acting anticompetitive. But if it’s not it’s entitled to that income. Again in the eu the dma couldn’t be drafted unless apple was “declared” to be anticompetitive.

App access restrictions by Apple, and to a lesser extent Google, unfairly stifled competition in those markets for years.

Again if apple were truly anticompetitive it would be fairly well known and trials and verdicts would be precedents for all to see. But there isnt much of that.

 

[webkit]

It’s chicken and egg. They couldn’t craft this gatekeeper nonsense unless they said apple was acting anti-competitively. Anticompetitive means different things in different places. But the fact is was “declaration” says it all that it’s nonsense. Even through the ramifications are huge.

It's formalized laws/regulations, not nonsense. Again, Apple can choose to follow the laws, face potential consequences, or exit the EU market.

If a company is acting anticompetitive. But if it’s not it’s entitled to that income. Again in the eu the dma couldn’t be drafted unless apple was “declared” to be anticompetitive.

Again, income gained through anticompetitive behavior is not income a company should have to begin with. If EU laws don't show that things like restricting alternative app stores, alternative payment options, alternative browser engines, etc. are illegal/anticompetitive behavior, Apple would never have made changes to iOS for the EU market. Any income those changes strip away is income Apple should not have to begin with.

Again if apple were truly anticompetitive it would be fairly well known and trials and verdicts would be precedents for all to see. But there isnt much of that.

Just because something may be "fairly well known" doesn't mean there isn't still some sort of potentially long process. The legal system can move glacially slow e.g., between FTC and DOJ investigations, lawsuit, etc. it took many years for Microsoft to be declared to have an OS monopoly with Windows.

 

[I7guy]

It's formalized laws/regulations, not nonsense. Again, Apple can choose to follow the laws, face potential consequences, or exit the EU market.

It’s still a finding where apple did not face their accuser without that it beomces an opinion. Whether apple exits the eu or not is not this conversation.

Again, income gained through anticompetitive behavior is not income a company should have to begin with.

If it were so. Apple is keeping their income and that must mean they are not anticompetitive. The eu is trying to fine them but this will take a while to sort out. This is what happens with crappy legislation.

If EU laws don't show that things like restricting alternative app stores, alternative payment options, alternative browser engines, etc. are illegal/anticompetitive behavior, Apple would never have made changes to iOS for the EU market. Any income those changes strip away is income Apple should not have to begin with.

Chicken and egg again.

Just because something may be "fairly well known" doesn't mean there isn't still some sort of potentially long process. The legal system can move glacially slow e.g., between FTC and DOJ investigations, lawsuit, etc. it took many years for Microsoft to be declared to have an OS monopoly with Windows.

And it may take years for apple to be vindicated.

 

[webkit]

It’s still a finding where apple did not face their accuser without that it beomces an opinion. Whether apple exits the eu or not is not this conversation.

Again, it's formalized laws/regulations. Apple can choose to follow the laws, face potential consequences, or exit the EU market. Apple has largely chosen to start following the laws at this point.

If it were so. Apple is keeping their income and that must mean they are not anticompetitive. The eu is trying to fine them but this will take a while to sort out. This is what happens with crappy legislation.

Additional income that came from Apple's anticompetitive behavior of restricting alternative app stores, alternative payment systems, etc. was income they shouldn't have had. Any iOS developer and user money that will now be going to alternative app stores, payment systems, etc. is income Apple shouldn't have had to begin with. Apple, and to a lesser extent Google, unfairly stifled competition in the mobile app access market for years.

And it may take years for apple to be vindicated.

Or lose or make concessions, etc. Time will tell.

 

[I7guy]

Again, it's formalized laws/regulations. Apple can choose to follow the laws, face potential consequences, or exit the EU market. Apple has largely chosen to start following the laws at this point.

But then you agree anticompetitive is an opinion as apple has not faced a jury by their peers. Maybe they do that in the eu, but thankfully not in the US. And nobody said apple didn’t follow local laws and regulations.

Additional income that came from Apple's anticompetitive behavior of restricting alternative app stores, alternative payment systems, etc. was income they shouldn't have had.

Only if anticompetitive and so far no formal trial. So yeah their income was legitimate.

Any iOS developer and user money that will now be going to alternative app stores, payment systems, etc. is income Apple shouldn't have had to begin with.

Baloney. Apple was entitled to every nickel. This law is not going to put money into the hands of the developers. Anyone who makes money from the fallout from the dma is not entitled to it. It was someone else’s business. The dma was meant to neuter American tech.

Apple, and to a lesser extent Google, unfairly stifled competition in the mobile app access market for years.

No they haven’t.

Or lose or make concessions, etc. Time will tell.

Sure time will always tell.

 

[webkit]

But then you agree anticompetitive is an opinion as apple has not faced a jury by their peers. Maybe they do that in the eu, but thankfully not in the US. And nobody said apple didn’t follow local laws and regulations.

Once again, it's not just "opinion", it's formalized laws/regulations for the EU market.

Only if anticompetitive and so far no formal trial. So yeah their income was legitimate.

You don't need a "formal trial" to determine if a law is being violated. If I am driving 100 mph in a 55 mph zone, I am violating a speeding law regardless of whether I get pulled over, charged, go to trial, etc.

My point was that it was income Apple shouldn't have had, not necessarily that it should be retroactively taken away from them.

Baloney. Apple was entitled to every nickel. This law is not going to put money into the hands of the developers. Anyone who makes money from the fallout from the dma is not entitled to it. It was someone else’s business. The dma was meant to neuter American tech.

Apple is not "entitled" to income generated from illegal/anticompetitive behavior. If the legal system didn't move so glacially slow, Apple wouldn't (and shouldn't) have had some of the income they were getting from things like the App Store.

No they haven’t.

They absolutely have. Restricting alternative app access (app stores) and payment options stifled competition in the app access market.

 

[I7guy]

Once again, it's not just "opinion", it's formalized laws/regulations for the EU market.

Once again there was no trial, only some opinion about conduct.

You don't need a "formal trial" to determine if a law is being violated.

Don’t know where you are from, but yes you do. Otherwise it’s a “kangaroo court”.

If I am driving 100 mph in a 55 mph zone, I am violating a speeding law regardless of whether I get pulled over, charged, go to trial, etc.

And OJ was found innocent.

My point was that it was income Apple shouldn't have had, not necessarily that it should be retroactively taken away from them.

My point is without being declared anticompetitive, they are entitled to that income.

Apple is not "entitled" to income generated from illegal/anticompetitive behavior.

Yes, if illegal.

If the legal system didn't move so glacially slow, Apple wouldn't (and shouldn't) have had some of the income they were getting from things like the App Store.

So apple is guilty?

They absolutely have. Restricting alternative app access (app stores) and payment options stifled competition in the app access market.

No it didn’t. It’s apples platform, use it or not.

 

[webkit]

Once again there was no trial, only some opinion about conduct.

Don’t know where you are from, but yes you do. Otherwise it’s a “kangaroo court”.

And OJ was found innocent.

My point is without being declared anticompetitive, they are entitled to that income.

Yes, if illegal.

So apple is guilty?

No it didn’t. It’s apples platform, use it or not.

Enough already. I am not going to continue to go back and forth with you on your nonsense. I will simply refer you to my past comments.

 

[AppliedMicro]

That’s why the dma is crappy legislation.

That’s your reply to “Cause we want variety, consumer choice fair competition and competitive pricing”? 😂

Apple didn’t engage in anticompetitive behavior in the first place, there is no proof only some unsupported opinions.

They did. They‘ve been found guilty of it in (since you insist on such proof) in a U.S. court of law on at least one account.

No they don’t. They are using apples resources for free. Apple is trying with the ctf but who knows.

At this point you’re basically just lying making counterclaims with no regard to their veracity 🤣

They do pay the developer subscription and they do (will) pay the Core Technology Fee.
Cause the Core Technology Fee stands today as part of Apple’s current terms in Europe - it has not been found illegal yet.

👉 Apple charges developers through their Core Technology Fee, as it stands - they’r not using resources for free.

Everything else is, in your own words, just opinion. Can’t have it both ways, I7guy.

Anyone who makes money from the fallout from the dma is not entitled to it. It was someone else’s business. The dma was meant to neuter American tech.

Again, more baseless and unsubstantiated claims. Maybe you should wipe the foam from your mouth and argue your point.

nobody said apple didn’t follow local laws and regulations.

The decision in the Epic trial clearly said so on at least on point.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

The dma was meant to neuter American tech.

Think America wants to neuter American tech too tbh

U.S. Accuses Amazon of Illegally Protecting Monopoly in Online Retail (Published 2023)

The Federal Trade Commission and 17 states sued Amazon, saying its conduct in its online store and services to merchants illegally stifled competition.

www.nytimes.com

U.S. Accuses Google of Abusing Monopoly in Ad Technology (Published 2023)

The Justice Department’s antitrust lawsuit, which a group of states joined, was the fifth by U.S. officials against the company since 2020.

www.nytimes.com

Justice Department sues Apple, alleging it illegally monopolized the smartphone market

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in New Jersey, alleges that Apple has monopoly power in the smartphone market and leverages control over the iPhone.

apnews.com

 

[chmania]

We are supposed to live in a rules-based world, at least in the "West," so when rules are broken, fines will happen.

 

[I7guy]

That’s your reply to “Cause we want variety, consumer choice fair competition and competitive pricing”? 😂

No that’s my reply because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck etc

They did. They‘ve been found guilty of it in (since you insist on such proof) in a U.S. court of law on at least one account.

That one item is all you have anywhere to cite and it had nothing to do with the so-called App Store monopoly that gets thrown around here like a meme.😂

At this point you’re basically just lying making counterclaims with no regard to their veracity 🤣

The fact that apple was forced to allow epic back in is the proof.😝

They do pay the developer subscription and they do (will) pay the Core Technology Fee.
Cause the Core Technology Fee stands today as part of Apple’s current terms in Europe - it has not been found illegal yet.

Right, but that’s a contention right now. If it weren’t a contention it would be a different story. The bottom line is that the eu crafted the dam to operate the App Store for free in the eu.

👉 Apple charges developers through their Core Technology Fee, as it stands - they’r not using resources for free.

Everything else is, in your own words, just opinion. Can’t have it both ways, I7guy.

Neither can you. Either the ctf is legit or not. If it is legit then it wouldn’t be challenged. If the other fees and commissions weren’t legit, then they wouldn’t be challenged. It’s pretty clear the eu intentions. Not more consumer choice, less vertical integration— which I fully support.

Again, more baseless and unsubstantiated claims. Maybe you should wipe the foam from your mouth and argue your point.

The dma is the proof. You may not like the conclusion but it is the proof.

The decision in the Epic trial clearly said so on at least on point.

That one point is all you have and it challenge the so called monopoly of the App Store that you guys keep talking about. All you have is the least important point and it isn’t even being enforced it’s so minor.😂

 

[I7guy]

Think America wants to neuter American tech too tbh

U.S. Accuses Amazon of Illegally Protecting Monopoly in Online Retail (Published 2023)

The Federal Trade Commission and 17 states sued Amazon, saying its conduct in its online store and services to merchants illegally stifled competition.

www.nytimes.com

U.S. Accuses Google of Abusing Monopoly in Ad Technology (Published 2023)

The Justice Department’s antitrust lawsuit, which a group of states joined, was the fifth by U.S. officials against the company since 2020.

www.nytimes.com

Justice Department sues Apple, alleging it illegally monopolized the smartphone market

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in New Jersey, alleges that Apple has monopoly power in the smartphone market and leverages control over the iPhone.

apnews.com

Nice moving the goalposts.👍

 

[AppliedMicro]

And OJ was found innocent.

Great example!
Particularly since OJ wasn’t found innocent - he was found liable for the murders.

And also: Failing to prove beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law that someone’s guilty does not mean that someone’s innocent. Same is true for the Epic trial: Epic failing to prove it on more counts does not mean that Apple is innocent of behaving anticompetitiv.

Either the ctf is legit or not. If it is legit then it wouldn’t be challenge

Either Apple is acting anticompetitive or not. If they legitimately aren’t acting anticompetitive, they wouldn’t be challenged (by so many competitors, regulators and lawmakers in jurisdictions around the world).

We both agree. 👍

The dma is the proof. You may not like the conclusion but it is the proof.

I fail to see any “conclusion” - you didn’t provide any reasoning to arrive at that.

I mean… since the law neither explicitly mentions “American” companies, nor are the gatekeepers all American, your mere opinion isn’t “proof”.

That one item is all you have anywhere to cite and it had nothing to do with the so-called App Store monopoly

It proves your previous claim wrong that Apple never acted anticompetitively.

And of course does that have to do with the App Store - given that the anti-steering clause is part of their conditions for access to the App Store.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

And OJ was found innocent.

He was found not guilty, that isn't the same as innocent.

Nice moving the goalposts.👍

Thanks!

 

[I7guy]

He was found not guilty, that isn't the same as innocent.

Same end result even with the semantics. He walked. And today with the semantics, he wasn’t found guilty.

Thanks!

You’re welcome.