Apple Hits Back at EU Law in Court

[surferfb]

The right to live....without the constant worry of getting sick, the ability to send your kids to school and higher education, and finally retiring with dignity...not needing to be confined to an "ecosystem." Hmmm...

Healthcare, education, retirement are (in my opinion) rights that can justify stringent regulations and higher taxes.

"I want an open ecosystem but I think Android is icky" is not (again, in my opinion) something that justifies government interference in the free market. If you want open, pick Android. You don't have a right for Apple to make you the exact product you want. And European companies shouldn't have a right to use Apple's hard work for free. It chills innovation. But don't listen to me, even European ministers think they've gone too far.

See:

‘Pendulum has swung way too far’ on EU regulating tech, says German minister

“We have to master technology ourselves,” Karsten Wildberger tells POLITICO.

www.politico.eu

 

[d-klumpp]

Gotta say I'm with EU on this one. if the security of your device relies on exclusive control over an entire ecosystem, you are doing it wrong anyway. Instead, create paths that let 3rd party **** talk to yours **** and secure those paths.

Applying this same logic to the vaunted European auto industry: BMW must make their cars easily compatible with Audi engines and transmissions and UI. Users have a right to swap as they see fit!

 

[raythompsontn]

But we are proud of our rights as employees and workers

Are you also proud of your income tax on earnings, as much as 50%? There is a cost for all that "free" stuff. You pay monthly for that "free" healthcare. Others pay when needed or used.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Are you also proud of your income tax on earnings, as much as 50%? There is a cost for all that "free" stuff. You pay monthly for that "free" healthcare. Others pay when needed or used.

Exactly how "not" to have a modern collective society on something like healthcare, particularly when considering vastly better and less expensive outcomes and lived experiences via preventative care.

The uniquely American way of doing healthcare has enormous downstream negative effects due to the tie to employers. It creates tremendous friction for mobility that greatly advantages the employment side.

We could go all day on the societal ramifications of that which are not thought about enough.

 

[MilaM]

Applying this same logic to the vaunted European auto industry: BMW must make their cars easily compatible with Audi engines and transmissions and UI. Users have a right to swap as they see fit!

BMW is not asking cab drivers to pay a commission on the profit they make when they drive as a taxi or uber. They don't collect a fee when you otherwise "make money" using the hardware and the OS they sold you.

BMW is also not restricting (with DRM) who you take for a ride or where you can drive your car.

You can in fact change a lot of hardware on your car. And the manufacturer even has to provide you with schematics and software tools for diagnostics. Not for free, but at a reasonable price.

Replace BMW with any other car maker if you wish.

 

[Happy_John]

The gatekeeper ruling is in part EU revenge on US tech companies for buying up all the leading European tech firms and promptly running them into the ground. Just look at what Microsoft did to Nokia. I'm not sure what Apple did to bring their ire having only a 30% market share in the EU but here we are.

By not paying tax.

 

[Happy_John]

Costs have always been higher in Europe due to consumer laws and employment red tape. You also have excess import duties, including subsidies for big entertainment groups who argued Apple devices were facilitating harmful copyright infringement. Quite frankly, it's incredible Apple doesn't charge even more of a markup in Europe.

Consumer laws benefit the consumer. Employment red tape benefits the employee. These are very good things.

 

[I7guy]

BMW is not asking cab drivers to pay a commission on the profit they make when they drive as a taxi or uber.

Correct BMW made it's revenue when the car was sold. And the dealers don't get to keep the vehicles for free and BMW doesn't subsidize the buildings and labor the dealer uses to sell it's cars.

BMW is also not restricting (with DRM) who you take for a ride, and you can drive your car.

No BMWs have a speed limiter.

You can in fact change a lot of hardware on your car.

And you can also void your warranty.

And the manufacturer even has to provide you with schematics and software tools for diagnostics.

I know of no laws that says BMW has to sell it's proprietary tools to anyone that asks.

Not for free, but at a reasonable price.

See above.

 

[I7guy]

By not paying tax.

Legally.

 

[chmania]

Most people shouting vehemently against Android seem to forget that Android is American as well. Only, its growth is helped by a whole bunch of open source developers from around the world.

 

[MilaM]

I know of no laws that says BMW has to sell it's proprietary tools to anyone that asks.

They have to sell access to all diagnostics and schematics that an independent repair shop needs to service or repair your car.

 

[dumastudetto]

Consumer laws benefit the consumer. Employment red tape benefits the employee. These are very good things.

I somewhat agree, but people need to understand those things come at the cost of higher prices.

 

[MilaM]

Correct BMW made it's revenue when the car was sold. And the dealers don't get to keep the vehicles for free and BMW doesn't subsidize the buildings and labor the dealer uses to sell it's cars.

Apple asking to be paid for third party services provided on iPhones is like BMW asking a cab driver for a share of his revenue because they are using BMWs intellectual property to drive around.

Buying a BMW is the same thing as buying an iPhone. Nowadays, both things are a mostly chips and software.

 

[Happy_John]

I somewhat agree, but people need to understand those things come at the cost of higher prices.

They're not going to. Not on an Internet forum. People like entrenched opinions and foodfights, they're not here for "understanding".

 

[Happy_John]

Legally.

Actually no, it was ruled by court that it was not legal. It was the Irish government who, at the time of the court decision, declined to accept the back taxes from Apple (and why they did that is a complex issue).

But that's besides the point.

The question was why there is such an antagonistic relationship between the EU and Apple. Tax avoidance by Apple was where it started, that's the answer to the question that was asked.

 

[I7guy]

Apple asking to be paid for third party services provided on iPhones is like BMW asking a cab driver for a share of his revenue because they are using BMWs intellectual property to drive around.

Its like insurance charging you by the mile, which is a reality.

Buying a BMW is the same thing as buying an iPhone. Nowadays, both things are a mostly chips and software.

They can be marketed similar but the usage pattern is different. BMW can charge per mile but it doesn't. Apple does. This is where the usage patterns diverge.

 

[I7guy]

Actually no, it was ruled by court that it was not legal. But that's besides the point.

The question was why there is such an antagonistic relationship between the EU and Apple. Tax avoidance by Apple was where it started, that's the answer to the question that was asked.

When they set it up it was legal. It took years of going through the courts to ultimately overturn that. And it wasn't Apple not paying it was Ireland.

 

[I7guy]

They have to sell access to all diagnostics and schematics that an independent repair shop needs to service or repair your car.

That's not the same as "to anyone". If you weren't a repair shop you couldn't get the tools.

 

[Happy_John]

When they set it up it was legal. It took years of going through the courts to ultimately overturn that. And it wasn't Apple not paying it was Ireland.

It was Apple not paying, and the Irish government not accepting payment. The Irish government were never obliged to pay on tax revenue that they had not received.

The "double sandwich" tax avoidance system was never legal in the EU, but it was legal under Irish law. One of the difficult points of the issue was whether EU law was higher than Irish law on tax matters.

The EU is not a United States of Europe. It is not a Federal and State system. I think this is often why Americans misunderstand what happens in Europe so often. The issue of the primacy of national sovereignty vs EU law is simply something that the USA does not have, to not nearly the same degree.

But you're derailing the topic here. What was asks was where the antagonism between Apple and the EU started. It started with tax.

 

[MilaM]

Its like insurance charging you by the mile, which is a reality.

They can be marketed similar but the usage pattern is different. BMW can charge per mile but it doesn't. Apple does. This is where the usage patterns diverge.

The competition for car insurance is very healthy. I can choose from dozens of different companies. Paying by mile is possible, but completely optional. When you want to sell your service on iPhones or Androids, there is no way around agreeing to Apple's or Google's terms => hence the Gatekeeper status.

Even if BMW started charging by mile/km, the consumer can choose another brand. Competition in the car space is still quite healthy. The same can not be said about smartphone operating systems.

 

[surferfb]

It was Apple not paying, and the Irish government not accepting. The Irish government were never obliged to pay taxes revenue that they had not received.

The "double sandwich" tax avoidance system was never legal in the EU, but it was legal under Irish law. One of the difficult points of the issue was whether EU law was higher than Irish law, on tax matters.

The EU is not a United States of Europe. It is not a Federal and State system. I think this is often my Americans misunderstand what happens in Europe so often. The issue of the primacy of national sovereignty vs EU law is simply something that the USA does not have,not nearly the same degree.

But you're derailing the topic here. What was asks was where the antagonism between Apple and the EU started. It started with tax.

No, it started because you had a competition minister (Vestager) who was hopelessly biased against Big Tech and went looking for reasons to go after them, and used the Ireland tax arrangement to do so when it came to Apple. Under Irish law, Apple didn't owe the tax, because why would a non-resident company owe taxes to Ireland on sales that happen outside of Ireland? It's like saying BMW owes tax to the US on Canadian sales because BMW's North American headquarters is in the US. It's ludicrous.

The first court smacked her down, but she got the higher court to overturn it. That's life, but most independent observers were shocked at the higher ruling. So, in effect, the EU stole tax revenue from the US (because Apple had long ago paid the tax in the US by the time the ruling came down) and gave it to Ireland who didn't want it. Which is why many over here, including the current US administration, don't think the EU plays fair like they claim to.

 

[MilaM]

That's not the same as "to anyone". If you weren't a repair shop you couldn't get the tools.

The important thing is, that I can choose to use an independent repair shop. This competition keeps the licensed dealers at least somewhat honest.

 

[I7guy]

The important thing is, that I can choose to use an independent repair shop. This competition keeps the licensed dealers at least somewhat honest.

It's also important to note you can choose an alternate carrier and phone.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

That's not the same as "to anyone". If you weren't a repair shop you couldn't get the tools.

There is a multitude of different such laws. Considering they have to give unrestricted access to independent and anyone can get this information irrespective if you’re a dealership or just a car owner.

Still with repairs your car must go through a mandatory car inspection.

https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/eu-secondary-market-for-automotive-repair-receives-clarity-on-access-to-vehicle-data

 

[I7guy]

The competition for car insurance is very healthy.

There are literally hundreds of phones and multiple app stores. the phone market and app store market is healthy.

I can choose from dozens of different companies. Paying by mile is possible, but completely optional. When you want to sell your service on iPhones or Androids, there is no way around agreeing to Apple's or Google's terms => hence the Gatekeeper status.

Hence a made up term to hobble american tech. there are literally more then two app stores. (Seems we've been down this rabbit hole and nobody is changing another's mind)

Even if BMW started charging by mile/km, the consumer can choose another brand. Competition in the car space is still quite healthy. The same can not be said about smartphone operating systems.

Wait are we talking operating systems, because each different phone is literally customize.