Apple Says UK App Store Steering Rules Would Be 'Highly Intrusive'

[I7guy]

You don’t see any? What about dealer and broker licensing laws, franchise laws, truth in adverting laws, odometer disclosure laws, safety/inspection laws, title/registration laws, warranty laws, credit/financing laws, other general consumer protection laws, etc.?

None of that matters or helps when I buy a car and get”a lousy deal”. Everything you mentioned is pre sale or post sale.

 

[webkit]

None of that matters or helps when I buy a car and get”a lousy deal”. Everything you mentioned is pre sale or post sale.

Nonsense. Much or all of it can help because the laws/regulations can make the car shopping and buying process easier, more fair, more transparent, etc. to the customer. Although nothing is perfect, without those laws/regulations the process would be much worse for consumers.

 

[delsoul]

Why are the euros so obsessed with heavy regulations when they don’t make anything of relevance themselves?

Could be why they make nothing of relevance in 2026 🧐

 

[I7guy]

Nonsense. Much or all of it can help because the laws/regulations can make the car shopping and buying process easier, more fair, more transparent, etc. to the customer. Although nothing is perfect, without those laws/regulations the process would be much worse for consumers.

Nonsense. It’s all well and good to have regulations that protect the public at large from fraud, however there are no regulations that guarantee a ”good deal”. And why not? Maybe there should be regulations that make for guaranteed retail pricing.

Edit: odometer laws were mentioned. Does that stop a dealer from rolling back the odometer? No, it makes it easier to prosecute. Similarly, because Apple strives to keep the App Store “safe as possible” does that mean a miscreant app will never get through?

 

[eifelbube]

The European Parliament’s Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) report on the DMA, explicitly advocated for changing the DMA’s thresholds to keep U.S. firms within scope while exempting most EU competitors - which led to amendments to the DMA. The report's author, Andreas Schwab, a German MEP, suggested the DMA should "unquestionably" target only the five biggest U.S. firms.

Please note:
The “suggested” link for the German MRP takes you the PMYNT newswire main page which today has at the top an article with the title “Freightos Enterprise Debuts as Global Freight Procurement Option for Large Shippers”. When you scroll down a bit, you get a link for Charles Schwab which is s company. I continued srolling the main page but can’t seem to find the suggestion by Andreas Schwab.

 

[surferfb]

Please note:
The “suggested” link for the German MRP takes you the PMYNT newswire main page which today has at the top an article with the title “Freightos Enterprise Debuts as Global Freight Procurement Option for Large Shippers”. When you scroll down a bit, you get a link for Charles Schwab which is s company. I continued srolling the main page but can’t seem to find the suggestion by Andreas Schwab.

No idea how the wrong link got pasted there. Here is a link to the article in question:

US Security Council Urges EU To Stop Singling Out American Tech Firms | PYMNTS.com

The U.S. National Security Council (NSC) told the European Union to stop using the Digital Markets Act (DMA) to target American technology giants, the

www.pymnts.com

The U.S. National Security Council (NSC) told the European Union to stop using the Digital Markets Act (DMA) to target American technology giants, the Financial Times reported, citing sources.

“We are particularly concerned about recent comments by the European Parliament rapporteur for the Digital Markets Act, Andreas Schwab, who suggested that the DMA should unquestionably target only the five biggest U.S. firms,” according to a June 9 email seen by FT.


He said it more than once too, here is another quote from Herr Schwab.

"Let’s focus first on the biggest problems, let’s go down the line – one, two, three, four, five – and maybe six will be Alibaba. But let’s not start with number seven to include a European gatekeeper just to please Joe Biden.” That was after he successfully got the market cap and annual revenue thresholds raised to avoid hitting European companies.

U.S. regulatory inaction opened the doors for the EU to step up on internet | Brookings

It is time for a Western Digital Alliance that harmonizes the rules that will govern the internet on both sides of the Atlantic, Tom Wheeler writes.

www.brookings.edu

 

[eifelbube]

But you don't have to take my word for it, here is Senior Fellow in Law and Economics and professor at University Liege Dirk Auer:

The spectre of protectionist intervention is reinforced by the fact that revenue thresholds outlined in the DMA seem designed purposefully to exclude European platforms, notably Spotify.

He goes on saying:

“Even if one believes regulation is necessary, a more nuanced approach is surely called for. Luckily, the European Parliament and the Council remain free to correct the Commission’s oversights and pursue a more restrained vision of regulation. ​

Dec 17, 2020 - 16:00 Last updated: Dec 18, 2024 - 16:08”​

This was before the DMA went into effect, it appears. So far it seems, Parliament and Council have not ordered the Commission to revise regulation pertaining to Apple and Google. But who knows, maybe the Man in DC will “reach out” to Parliament and Council and ask them in his oh so “tarifficly” cooperative and polite way to “regulate” the Commission …

 

[eifelbube]

No idea how the wrong link got pasted there. Here is a link to the article in question:

US Security Council Urges EU To Stop Singling Out American Tech Firms | PYMNTS.com

The U.S. National Security Council (NSC) told the European Union to stop using the Digital Markets Act (DMA) to target American technology giants, the

www.pymnts.com

The U.S. National Security Council (NSC) told the European Union to stop using the Digital Markets Act (DMA) to target American technology giants, the Financial Times reported, citing sources.

“We are particularly concerned about recent comments by the European Parliament rapporteur for the Digital Markets Act, Andreas Schwab, who suggested that the DMA should unquestionably target only the five biggest U.S. firms,” according to a June 9 email seen by FT.


He said it more than once too, here is another quote from Herr Schwab.

"Let’s focus first on the biggest problems, let’s go down the line – one, two, three, four, five – and maybe six will be Alibaba. But let’s not start with number seven to include a European gatekeeper just to please Joe Biden.” That was after he successfully got the market cap and annual revenue thresholds raised to avoid hitting European companies.

U.S. regulatory inaction opened the doors for the EU to step up on internet | Brookings

It is time for a Western Digital Alliance that harmonizes the rules that will govern the internet on both sides of the Atlantic, Tom Wheeler writes.

www.brookings.edu

Thanks. - PYMNTS wants me to agree to their data sharing terms and FT wants my money first. But no worries, I have no doubts whatsoever that your references are correct. I was also interested in the respective contexts.

 

[webkit]

Nonsense. It’s all well and good to have regulations that protect the public at large from fraud, however there are no regulations that guarantee a ”good deal”. And why not? Maybe there should be regulations that make for guaranteed retail pricing.

Guaranteed retail pricing? You mean something like price fixing? There are actually laws against that which is a reason MSRP has an "S" in it for SUGGESTED. The reality is that there can be a lot of variables when it comes to pricing which can make it difficult to set so-called guaranteed prices in all circumstances, markets, sources, etc.

Edit: odometer laws were mentioned. Does that stop a dealer from rolling back the odometer? No, it makes it easier to prosecute. Similarly, because Apple strives to keep the App Store “safe as possible” does that mean a miscreant app will never get through?

That's like arguing that laws regarding violent crime don't make streets safer because people still commit violent crimes. Laws and regulations are meant to try to deter certain types of behaviors. When that doesn't work, yes, lawsuits, prosecutions, etc. can become necessary whether criminal or civil.

 

[I7guy]

Guaranteed retail pricing? You mean something like price fixing?

You’re right. Then back to Apple they are charging what their service is worth to them. What the market will bear.

There are actually laws against that which is a reason MSRP has an "S" in it for SUGGESTED. The reality is that there can be a lot of variables when it comes to pricing which can make it difficult to set so-called guaranteed prices in all circumstances, markets, sources, etc.

So in essence buying a car is one of the worse processes ever. And while there are a cadre of regulations that serve to protect the consumer it doesn’t really help them get a good deal. Circling back to Apple why is it anybody’s business what they charge for fees and commissions?

That's like arguing that laws regarding violent crime don't make streets safer because people still commit violent crimes. Laws and regulations are meant to try to deter certain types of behaviors. When that doesn't work, yes, lawsuits, prosecutions, etc. can become necessary whether criminal or civil.

I think we’re in agreement. Car buying for the most part is a bad experience and the customer sales process is the Wild West and no regulations to prevent getting screwed over by the dealership. Apple may or may not have run afoul of one or more antitrust regulations and the outcome remains to be seen.