Apple Loses EU Fight Over App Store Gatekeeper Label

[BaldiMac]

And has to be approved by both houses.

Nope. Only the senate (with its wildly disproportionate representation).

 

[Smartuser]

Switcher did not come across as condescending to me. You mentioned the subject of appeal in your original post. He simply addresses it. The problem is MR’s wording “top court” as you rightly point to. The General Court is a constituent court of the Court of Justice of the EU, so “top” is ambiguous. With MR on controversial topics, I usually follow their reference link. In this case, when you go to Reuters, you’ll see “Apple can appeal on matters of law to the Court of Justice of the European Union, Europe's ‌highest.”

It's simply deficient reporting if a make-or-break item that devalues the entire article is missing. The fact that this could be looked up somewhere doesn't mitigate that. The whole slant of the article with "loses the fight" and "top court" is misleading.

 

[Smartuser]

Can you link to an article on the web that substantiates this claim?

How on earth can someone give a "disagree" reaction to this person asking for proof of something? Ridiculous.

 

[Smartuser]

Although I couldn't find any surveys on DMA, I did find this survey on digital sovereignty.
View attachment 2644068

Digital Decade 2026: Special Eurobarometer

This Special Eurobarometer on the Digital Decade 2026 shows the results of a survey conducted between February and March 2026.

digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu

Those questions would have a similar outcome anywhere in the world at any time if you replace "The EU" with whatever country or group of countries respondents are in. This is built on response bias by asking the general population agreeable questions in a way that doesn't really give them meaningful alternatives or detail the implications.

Gotta love the response to the last question. Also embarrassing is "dependencies on digital". They're missing a word.

I think this is absolutely worthless if one wants to find out whether people agree with specific laws and their implications.

 

[Xiao_Xi]

And having a dominant position in the EU used to require 40% of the market in question. Which is why the DMA exists in the first place, traditional antitrust doesn’t apply and the EU wanted to force Apple open so they needed to come up with new rules.

My bad, you are right.

Dominance is considered unlikely where the company has less than a 40 % market share.

Commission guidance on enforcement priorities related to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings | EUR-Lex

eur-lex.europa.eu

 

[eifelbube]

EU: don't innovate, regulate

US: don’t inundate, regulate

 

[eifelbube]

I feel like this should be in the Political area, as other similar topics always have been.

EU v Apple … Google … topics traditionally have had the “Due to the polarized or social nature of the discussion …” footnote. When I read the article mid-morning AZ time, it had that classification, except it said “political”, of course …

 

[eifelbube]

I will never understand how a conglomeration of almost 3rd world crud holes can tell companies from other countries how to run almost every aspect of their business....... Even on simple things that dont directly and significantly affect their actual customers.

Donald, is that you? Because “3rd world crud holes” is on the same intellectual level as characterizing people from a foreign culture as “garbage” or “Their country stinks” is.

 

[eifelbube]

Apple has crippled phone features precisely because of the eu. These laws don’t broaden competition, they take a working system and give apples functionality and intellectual property away. In no way that is good.

Apple crippled them because their software engineering know-how is too limited to make them comply with the DMA. These laws broaden competition, no functionality and intellectual property are given away.

 

[lusty]

No it’s not. It’s not a monopoly anywhere.

Apple had 100% of app distribution on iOS.

No. It’s taking apples assets and giving them away. That’s not making space for competition.

No it’s not, what do you think is being taken from Apple?

Apple is not stifling competition. There is an App Store that sells billions every year that says so.

That app store is the issue and Apple consistently abuse their position to stifle innovation and competition. Have you even read their rules? Some types of app are banned completely from the platform, and Apple get an unnecessarily large cut of your profits either way. Total abuse of position. Downloading apps costs essentially nothing and handling transactions is not worth what they charge. They also take a cut from subscriptions even those created elsewhere, Patreon has been hugely affected by this for instance.

 

[eifelbube]

actually that's called a 'logical fallacy'

Maybe that is what you call it but to me it is not

Apple hasn't forced anyone into anything.

No such claim was made.

The unelected EU Commission imposes dictates.

Incorrect. See below. See the full text on Wikipedia.

Currently, there is one Commissioner per member, but members are bound by their oath of office to represent the interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. The Commission president (currently Ursula von der Leyen is nominated by the European Council (the 27 heads of government) and must win the confidence of the European Parliament before assuming office. The Council of the European Union then nominates the other members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated president, and the entire cabinet is then subjected to a final vote of confidence in the European Parliament.​

 

[BlankStar]

Last time I checked, the Apple store is not legally required to provide shelf space to any vendor. Rolex need not sell Seikos. In fact, all retail businesses, even giants like Walmart, select their vendors -- not the government. I cannot see why digital stores should be any different.

But when you want to switch to another analog watch, you just buy another one and it works. It's about a one time purchase. The EU isn't asking Apple to sell android phones in the Apple Stores.
Switching from an iPhone or Android phone to other was a pain in the <synonym for donkey> and not talking about local data, but about purchases you made. Imagine you bought loads of music and movies from the iTunes store, and a lot of paid apps. How easy is it to transfer these? And there lies the difference between physical retail and a digital platform like iOS.

 

[eifelbube]

Last time I checked, the Apple store is not legally required to provide shelf space to any vendor. Rolex need not sell Seikos. In fact, all retail businesses, even giants like Walmart, select their vendors -- not the government. I cannot see why digital stores should be any different.

Why would I want to buy shelf space? And digital stores have shelf space? Why would I care what vendors Walmart selects? If they did not sell my contact lens solution Boston Simplus, I’d buy it at Walgreens or CVS or order it from Amazon. I don’t want to buy shelf space for my iPhone or iPad, I want to buy apps.

 

[Smartuser]

But when you want to switch to another analog watch, you just buy another one and it works. It's about a one time purchase. The EU isn't asking Apple to sell android phones in the Apple Stores.
Switching from an iPhone or Android phone to other was a pain in the <synonym for donkey> and not talking about local data, but about purchases you made. Imagine you bought loads of music and movies from the iTunes store, and a lot of paid apps. How easy is it to transfer these? And there lies the difference between physical retail and a digital platform like iOS.

Analog watches aren't computers. Different types of products exist. Instead of cooking up complicated six course dinners, why don't restaurants switch to selling people a nice bowl of cereals? It's instant, no cooking involved, virtually everyone likes it, it's inexpensive and nothing can go wrong.

Music and Movies bought from Apple can be played on all kinds of platforms including Android.

For apps, it depends on the maker of the app. Non-Apple Apps that can be used on different platforms with the same license include Office 365 and Adobe Creative Cloud.

 

[spazzcat]

Apple had 100% of app distribution on iOS.

...

Apple is not stifling competition. There is an App Store that sells billions every year that says so.

You can't have a monopoly on your own product. iOS is an operating system that runs on smart phones. You have multiple smart phones and you have two operating and in the EU Apple has less than 30% of this smart phone market.

Third-party App Store have been a complete flop as predicted. People want simplicity, not complexity.

 

[surferfb]

Apple had 100% of app distribution on iOS.

And McDonalds has 100% of hamburger distribution in their restaurants. That doesn’t mean they have a monopoly.

No it’s not, what do you think is being taken from Apple?

Under the DMA, Apple is being required to give access to its innovations and its intellectual property to its competitors for free. If Apple offers a feature in iOS in the EU, they don’t get to keep it for themselves to differentiate their products or protect their customers - it’s taken from them and given to its competitors.

The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper.

That app store is the issue and Apple consistently abuse their position to stifle innovation and competition. Have you even read their rules? Some types of app are banned completely from the platform, and Apple get an unnecessarily large cut of your profits either way. Total abuse of position. Downloading apps costs essentially nothing and handling transactions is not worth what they charge. They also take a cut from subscriptions even those created elsewhere, Patreon has been hugely affected by this for instance.

iOS is Apple’s intellectual property. Apple is well within its rights to decide how that property is used and what they charge for that use. No one is forcing developers to write apps for iOS if they don’t like it.

 

[surferfb]

But when you want to switch to another analog watch, you just buy another one and it works. It's about a one time purchase. The EU isn't asking Apple to sell android phones in the Apple Stores.

Just buy another phone and it works.

Switching from an iPhone or Android phone to other was a pain in the <synonym for donkey> and not talking about local data, but about purchases you made. Imagine you bought loads of music and movies from the iTunes store, and a lot of paid apps. How easy is it to transfer these? And there lies the difference between physical retail and a digital platform like iOS.

Switching from an existing iPhone to a new iPhone is also a pain in the donkey.

Music and movies are easily transferred. Around 95% of app installs are free apps, and the bulk of paid apps/services are cross-platform subscriptions.

 

[jjrtiger]

thanks, yes, correct, see this now further down in the article i linked: “Trump asked the court to overturn Humphrey's Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision upholding removal restrictions for leaders of multimember administrative agencies”. Recent decision is a step backwards for separation of powers, sadly.

So the executive should not be able to fire people in the executive branch? That leaves you with a bunch of bureaucrats who are unaccountable

That doesn’t make sense.

 

[I7guy]

Apple had 100% of app distribution on iOS.

Sure it’s their store. Don’t know where internet posters get the mistaken thought companies can’t have proprietary products.

No it’s not, what do you think is being taken from Apple?

Their intellectual property.

That app store is the issue and Apple consistently abuse their position to stifle innovation and competition.

No they do t.

Have you even read their rules?

Yes. And because you may not like the rules didn’t make them illegal.

Some types of app are banned completely from the platform,

It’s apples right.

and Apple get an unnecessarily large cut of your profits either way.

Perfectly legal. It’s completely opt-in.

Total abuse of position.

In your opinion.

Downloading apps costs essentially nothing and handling transactions is not worth what they charge. They also take a cut from subscriptions even those created elsewhere, Patreon has been hugely affected by this for instance.

None of that matters. Don’t like apples products, there is competition.

 

[I7guy]

Apple crippled them because their software engineering know-how is too limited to make them comply with the DMA.

Apple crippled them because the DMA forced them to give away their IP.

These laws broaden competition, no functionality and intellectual property are given away.

The laws take apples IP and give them away for nothing. That’s not broadening the competition in any sense of the word.

 

[eifelbube]

Sure. 100% agree. Let the eu develop their own social media platforms, google services replaces and smartphone replacements. I’ll wait about 50 years to see if it happens.

At least you don’t have to wait for their own social media platform 😊

https://cybernews.com/tech/europe-social-media-w/

 

[eifelbube]

So the executive should not be able to fire people in the executive branch? That leaves you with a bunch of bureaucrats who are unaccountable

That is exactly what Trump said — classic autocratic argument.

 

[UliBaer]

Sure. 100% agree. Let the eu develop their own social media platforms, google services replaces and smartphone replacements. I’ll wait about 50 years to see if it happens.

Sure. And a side benefit would be the excessive regulations would be a thing of the past.

Wow, you really completely misread/misinterpret my post, but I think that was absolutely intended by you, knowing your attitude, so I simply ignore that fact and be happy, you even answered! 👍 😁

 

[Samplasion]

I just love how DMA detractors always post vague statements like "the DMA forces Apple to give away their intellectual property" but never actually specify *what* exactly is being given away or to whom

edit: grammar

 

[surferfb]

I just love how DMA detractor always post vague statements like "the DMA forces Apple to give away their intellectual property" but never actually specify *what* exactly is being given away or to whom

The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper.

“Hardware and software features controlled by iOS” are Apple’s intellectual property.

For example, Apple introduced a feature that lets AirPods translate languages. Apple had to delay the release of that feature in Europe until they made it available for competing headphone manufacturers to use.

This is bad because 1) it discourages Apple from innovating by significantly changing the ROI calculation (why spend a bunch of money on a feature that differentiates your products if your competitors then get the feature without having to spend a bunch of money - you’re effectively subsidizing your competitors) and 2) discourages other companies from innovating (why spend millions of dollars to develop competing, potentially better translation features when you can just use Apple’s for free) 3) Is taking Apple’s IP from them without compensation for no legitimate reason (there is nothing preventing Bose from developing a translation feature in their headphones).

Hope that helps!