Apple Pushes Back Against India's New Digital Market Regulations

[vipergts2207]

Okay so epic lost almost the entire case it brought against apple with the exception of one ruling. Still in all it’s a giant win for apple.

As I said, a great example of winning the battle but losing the war. And hard to know which way the judge will go, but if she rules that Apple's solution doesn't satisfy her ruling on anti-steering, that could be a huge blow to Apple.

Epic asks judge to enforce the Apple App Store injunction

Apple’s rules for app payments are still too harsh, says Epic.

www.theverge.com

 

[BaldiMac]

That when it comes to iOS and reaching those users, you either obey Apple's every whim or take the alternative and simply forfeit access to those consumers.

Or reach them through the web. But nice job describing a normal thing in loaded terms to make it seem ominous!

"If you want access my property, you have to follow my rules". Ooooh, how naughty.

I'll never understand the hoops that people jump through to make anything they disagree with into something illegal. Here's a real argument for your side. "Apple has gotten so big and important to global commerce that we want them to open up new opportunities for developers."

 

[vipergts2207]

Or reach them through the web. But nice job describing a normal thing in loaded terms to make it seem ominous!

"If you want access my property, you have to follow my rules". Ooooh, how naughty.

In reality there are nearly countless properties which have myriad owners and serve a massive number of different purposes. When it comes to mobile platforms, there are but two. Is it strange that the latter may be considered with more scrutiny?

I'll never understand the hoops that people jump through to make anything they disagree with into something illegal.

"Anything?" Or just unfairness and anti-competitiveness in the market? Of course someone would think the latter should be illegal. YMMV on what constitutes unfairness and anti-competitiveness.

Here's a real argument for your side. "Apple has gotten so big and important to global commerce that we want them to open up new opportunities for developers."

The first half of your quote is exactly what many folks have already been arguing for a long time. I suppose you could argue a goal should be to "open up new opportunities for developers," but more importantly it would be to make sure Apple can't unilaterally control the commerce that happens on a large number of consumers' phones.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

Just because I disagree with you about the whether the App Store should be illegal doesn't mean I support everything else Big Tech does.

I think I see our misunderstanding then. I'm not advocating to dismantle Apple's app store. I just want to be able to buy my phone software elsewhere if I so please.

App Store should stay put, but the gates should be open to an alternative. This would also push Apple to improve their business terms, their storefront, etc.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Apple has a minority share all around.

Appe is estimated to command a majority of mobile app spending (1, 2).

Again the lack of innovation in developing operating systems is not apples problem.

Fully agree. It's not Apple's problem - but mainly the problem of third parties.
That's why regulation is needed to balance out their interests against Apple.

There is always the web.

Not a viable alternative for many apps (due to storage and performance constraints, let alone lack of offline use).

Again this is not apples problem. Don’t make the lack of ingenuity on someone who doesn’t want to contract with apple, apple’s problem

Agree, it's not Apple's problem. And it's not for a lack of ingenuity - the market will only sustain so many operating systems. An no newcomers that that lack an established ecosystem of third-party apps. Apple and Google are entrenched.

Apple and their business conduct is the problem.
That's why we need regulation to ensure fair competition - and swift and decisive penalties in case of non-compliance.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Android and iOS aren't towns. They're property, just like Walmart or Disney World.

Walmart or Disney World don't control the entire market and entire industries' access to consumers.

It's not like hundreds of banks, public transport companies, communication and messaging services with hundreds of millions of users depend on Walmart or Disney World.

As you said yourself:

"Here's a real argument for your side. "Apple has gotten so big and important to global commerce that we want them to open up new opportunities for developers.""

Exactly.

Apple is more important to global commerce than Disney World. Or even Walmart. That is why governments should regulate Apple and impose restrictions on their business terms and exploitation of their property.

 

[lartola]

Because it's not true. There are certainly platforms other than iOS and Android.

No there aren’t. Or if there are they have such an irrelevant market share that devs can’t justify investing in them. Practically it’s just Apple and Android and that’s it.

 

[I7guy]

As I said, a great example of winning the battle but losing the war. And hard to know which way the judge will go, but if she rules that Apple's solution doesn't satisfy her ruling on anti-steering, that could be a huge blow to Apple.

Epic asks judge to enforce the Apple App Store injunction

Apple’s rules for app payments are still too harsh, says Epic.

www.theverge.com

It’s a great example of winning the battle and winning the war. No company is going to win everything all the time.

 

[vipergts2207]

It’s a great example of winning the battle and winning the war. No company is going to win everything all the time.

Apple is certainly proving the latter anyway.

 

[I7guy]

Apple is certainly proving the latter anyway.

As do most other fortune corporations. However the anti steering provision is still not being enforced. So there is that.

 

[I7guy]

Walmart or Disney World don't control the entire market and entire industries' access to consumers.

It's not like hundreds of banks, public transport companies, communication and messaging services with hundreds of millions of users depend on Walmart or Disney World.

As you said yourself:


Exactly.

Apple is more important to global commerce than Disney World. Or even Walmart. That is why governments should regulate Apple and impose restrictions on their business terms and exploitation of their property.

Using your logic if I want to read the WSJ there must be 50 ways to do it. No tech company is the gatekeeper for the world. Apple is the gatekeeper for their world though.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Using your logic if I want to read the WSJ there must be 50 ways to do it

No, I’m not really advocating any numbers.

But if there’s a duopoly of newspaper printing companies and/or distributors that control (gatekeep) access to 95 or more percent of the market (all consumers) with their distribution…

And if these duopoly companies start dictating the WSJ what subscription options they are allowed to advertise in their paper or what wording and layout is acceptable to do so. And then demand a 27% cut of all subscription revenue from side-printing and side-delivery - in other words, when the WSJ uses third-party printers and/or direct delivery to consumers.

At that point I’d know that something is seriously wrong with the market. Someone has got too much power - and needs to be regulated.

PS: Same if there is a duopoly in newspaper typesetting or layout software. I don’t care if duopoly software vendors “created” the technology. Once they start - and can enforce by technical means - demanding revenue share and dictating what can be printed or advertised in newspapers („sorry - you‘re prohibited from mentioning alternative purchasing or subscription methods“), I support regulation.

And I‘m not going to say: „Oh, but newspaper gatekeeper A only has a minority share if the market, so it‘s really unjust(ified) to regulate them“, when they control access to the 20% or 30% of readers that account for 55% percent of all newspaper revenue.

 

[vipergts2207]

As do most other fortune corporations. However the anti steering provision is still not being enforced. So there is that.

I think you need to go back and reread the facts of the case, my friend. It is in fact being enforced. This is why Apple had to make the changes that they did. However Epic’s view is that Apple’s chosen way to follow the provision does not comply with the judges intent in her ruling. The judge has yet to make a decision on whether Apple’s solution complies with her ruling. We’ll have to see what she says on that.

 

[I7guy]

I think you need to go back and reread the facts of the case, my friend. It is in fact being enforced. This is why Apple had to make the changes that they did. However Epic’s view is that Apple’s chosen way to follow the provision does not comply with the judges intent in her ruling. The judge has yet to make a decision on whether Apple’s solution complies with her ruling. We’ll have to see what she says on that.

Even so that is not “losing the war” and epic still does not get back into the US App Store.

 

[vipergts2207]

Even so that is not “losing the war” and epic still does not get back into the US App Store.

Losing the war refers to much more than the anti-steering provision in the Epic case. The EU’s DMA. India’s similar moves described in this post. Apple’s grip on consumers who use iOS is being loosened bit by bit. If India does in fact move forward with this, Apple will have been forced to make huge changes in 2 of the world’s 4 biggest markets. Throw in Japan and you’ve got 3 of the 5 biggest.

Japan Preparing EU-Style Law to Force Apple to Allow App Sideloading and More

Japan is preparing antitrust legislation to force Apple to allow app sideloading and alternative payment methods for in-app purchases, Nikkei Asia...

www.macrumors.com

 

[maxoakland]

It’s an interesting world we live in where consumer product features are increasingly being dictated by governments and regulators rather than consumer choice.

I wonder how long this phase will last before consumers demand freedom to make their own choices again?

Consumer choice is being limited by companies like Apple and Google. Government regulation is fixing that and giving us more choice

This is very “Freedom is Slavery” Newspeak type stuff

 

[maxoakland]

There is "no law" saying you have to be an iphone developer if it doesn't work for you.

There is no law saying you have to use an iPhone if you don’t like the regulations being placed on an iPhone. There’s no law saying you have to live in a country with regulations on the iPhone

If you don’t like the regulations placed on Apple by your country, just move to a different one! That’s logical, right?

 

[lartola]

There is no law saying you have to use an iPhone if you don’t like the regulations being placed on an iPhone. There’s no law saying you have to live in a country with regulations on the iPhone

If you don’t like the regulations placed on Apple by your country, just move to a different one! That’s logical, right?

Logical, but not realistic.

 

[maxoakland]

After some introspection, I'm not going to continue arguing with some of the Big Tech advocates in here. Hope India makes the right call.

You had great arguments and were very civil too. If they can’t understand, it’s because they didn’t want to

Logical, but not realistic.

Exactly why it’s also not reasonable to ask app devs to leave iOS if they don’t like Apple’s terms

 

[ProbablyDylan]

You had great arguments and were very civil too. If they can’t understand, it’s because they didn’t want to

Thanks for the kind words. Some people simply choose not to understand, either out of convenience, misplaced trust, or simply to be trolls. Unfortunately, I love to argue.

Logical, but not realistic.

The same conclusion can be reached for your arguments, friend.

 

[I7guy]

Losing the war refers to much more than the anti-steering provision in the Epic case. The EU’s DMA. India’s similar moves described in this post. Apple’s grip on consumers who use iOS is being loosened bit by bit. If India does in fact move forward with this, Apple will have been forced to make huge changes in 2 of the world’s 4 biggest markets. Throw in Japan and you’ve got 3 of the 5 biggest.

Japan Preparing EU-Style Law to Force Apple to Allow App Sideloading and More

Japan is preparing antitrust legislation to force Apple to allow app sideloading and alternative payment methods for in-app purchases, Nikkei Asia...

www.macrumors.com

They would have “lost the war” with the EU regardless of the US suit or not. In the US it was a decisive victory.

 

[vipergts2207]

They would have “lost the war” with the EU regardless of the US suit or not. In the US it was a decisive victory.

I didn’t say that one caused the other. Just observing that big picture, Apple is being forced to change, including in the U.S.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

In a Democracy an entity is able to do whatever it wants with their property to the point it interfaces with other entities properties. These interfaces make the realm where political negotiations occur.

Now there is a group of people that systematically argue that one should be able to do whatever it wants with their properties as an absolute value. The law should stay away: wins whoever has the largest $tick regardless of any other merits. An idea offered as counter argument to the regulations concerning such interfaces under debate.

It’s a point of view that is not new when it comes sustaining non democratic systems (Feudalism, Communism, Monarchies just to name a couple)... It’s totally incompatible with a Democratic system.

In this line of thought, is not at all surprising that sub ideas such as vote with your wallet as an instrument of equity are also commonly presented by these thinker$, that in my view are in essence in favor of the adoption of non Democratic systems, dispensing maybe even the peoples democratic vote in favor of a combination of ones wallet and the leadership of a technical elite measured by the amount of profits they have amassed.

Cheers.

 

[maxoakland]

In a Democracy an entity is able to do whatever it wants with their property to the point it interfaces with other entities properties. These interfaces make the realm where political negotiations occur.

Now there is a group of people that systematically argue that one should be able to do whatever it wants with their properties as an absolute value. The law should stay away: wins whoever has the largest $tick regardless of any other merits. An idea offered as counter argument to the regulations concerning such interfaces under debate. It’s a point of view that is not new when it comes sustaining non democratic systems (Feudalism, Communism, Monarchies just to name a couple)... It’s totally incompatible with a Democratic system. In this line, is not at all surprising that ideas such as vote with your wallet as an instrument of equity are also commonly presented by these thinker$, that in my view are in essence in favor of the adoption of non Democratic systems, dispensing maybe even the peoples vote in favor of a combination of ones wallet and the leadership of a technical elite measured by amount of profits they have or not amassed.

Cheers.

Huh, those are good points. If “vote with your wallet” was the only power we had, only the rich would have power. You’re right that is not Democracy but something more like Feudalism

 

[GrayFlannel]

Android and iOS aren't towns. They're property, just like Walmart or Disney World.

Brush up on the last mile concept. It stopped being a literal term 35-ish years ago.