Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Calls Out EU for Contradictory App Store Rules Under DSA and DMA

Sophisticatednut said:
Apple is likely the template for some parts of the DMA, but Google is then the stronger candidate to be structural template for it while most other companies such as Amazon and Meta shaped the rest. So your claim that Apple alone drove the DMA is an overly reductionist reading of a much broader regulatory design when the DMA is a horizontal regulatory framework built from decades of EU antitrust cases involving Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Apple, and different parts of the regulation were shaped by different companies engaging in the same structural practices
Click to expand...
My opinion is reductionist because I believe it to be the prevailing truth.
Sophisticatednut said:
No it’s by the legal body. You’re free to read or skim the 250~ page ruling
Click to expand...
That bod of work came out nearly two years after the DMA went into effect. So it seems like it was tail wagging the dog.
Sophisticatednut said:
Apple opted to implement radical changes that they had no obligations to do in convoluted ways. Something they could have done in multiple ways that would both save them time, money and resources while doing the same lock-ins, except the convoluted nature if that was their goal.
Click to expand...
Apple implemented the changes as such because they were the big loser with this regulation. The ruling was overreach and overly draconian. None of this is anything different than has been discussed over the last several threads spanning the last few years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: surferfb
I7guy said:
My opinion is reductionist because I believe it to be the prevailing truth.

That bod of work came out nearly two years after the DMA went into effect. So it seems like it was tail wagging the dog.

Apple implemented the changes as such because they were the big loser with this regulation. The ruling was overreach and overly draconian. None of this is anything different than has been discussed over the last several threads spanning the last few years.
Click to expand...
It’s unrelated to DMA as it’s from 2019. The ruling is about anti trust laws.
DMA came to legal action 2023 and would be legally questionable to use a difrent law that didn’t exist
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back