Apple Would Rather Pay Up to €50 Million in Fines Than Address 'Gatekeeper' App Store Behavior, Says EU Chief

[Kierkegaarden]

I can see where Apple is heading with this and it is heading to a court trial where a Judge will have to decide if what Apple is doing is within the confines of the law or not. The way i see it working is that Apple will stand firm, the dutch ACM will impose the maximum fine, Apple will pay it but still stand firm. The dutch ACM will then find another way to penalise Apple because they would have already gone as far as they can with the current system. Because Apple will still not have complied with the original dutch court ruling, the dutch ACM will impose some kind of sales ban which Apple will say it illegal and challenge the legality in court. Apple will then argue that they complied with the original courts ruling doing so within the confines of the law and what the dutch ACM is doing it interfering with a companies right to do business.

Apple will want a Judge to decide if they have complied with the original courts ruling, not the ACM and thus Apple will wait for the ACM to slip up which would allow Apple to then take the matter to court.

I remember a few years back reading an article about a millionaire in London who kept racking up parking fines on his very expensive flashy car because where he was parking it was not allowed but in an interview with the tabloid press he said he did not care because he can afford the fines.

Wealth breeds arrogance behaviour.

What arrogance? The ACM ordered Apple to allow for third party payments — Apple presented a solution — the ACM didn’t like it. Who is not being serious about this? Did the order specify what the solution should look like? My guess is that the ACM doesn’t know what they want — so how is Apple supposed to comply with this supposed law? The politicians don’t understand the technology, so they don’t get that the solution that was offered gave them what they asked for.

 

[0924487]

Towards open and fair world-wide trade​

The European Union is one of the most outward-oriented economies in the world. It is also the world’s largest single market area. Free trade among its members was one of the EU's founding principles, and it is committed to opening up world trade as well.

By that definition then it’s RCEP, not EU.

 

[ikramerica]

How interesting. We have everything standardized.

The single market seeks to guarantee the free movement of goods, capital, services, and people, known collectively as the "four freedoms.

It would be unimaginable to have different quality standards for food, cars or sold goods.

Safety regulations or standards for buildings or strictly local things might have higher quality requirements, but never lower. And we aren’t even a full Federation but have more unionized markets than USA.

There are federal standards which must be met no matter what if the product is regulated in any way, and then what is legal to sell in any specific state based on the laws of that state. Some differences are just labeling, others are material due to environmental factors or how controlling the legislature wants to be.

Example: eggs are graded by the federal government for size and quality, but some states only allow eggs from chickens raised in certain ways, or prevent sale of fertile eggs, etc.

 

[ksec]

Well 150 Comments and I stopped reading.

Why are you scared Apple supporters? You are extremely restrained today, 150 comments and not a single Pull out of the Netherland comments? What are you scared of? Just say it out loud, or I will help you

Pull out of the Netherland!.

It is only a 15M population country. A rounding error in Apple's bottom line. You guys should be pushing for this.

 

[0924487]

But doesn't the multiple sku requirement have a practical purpose that should prevail over the intent? This policy applies to one country. By requiring a separate sku (that can otherwise be identical and compiled 100% the same as the second sku in all other aspects), Apple is more capable of making sure that the code that applies to the single country doesn't get run in all the others by limiting distribution of that single APK.

It’s not about SKU, it’s about having a competitive market of iOS app distribution platforms and IAP transaction platforms.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Well 150 Comments and I stopped reading.

Why are you scared Apple supporters? You are extremely restrained today, 150 comments and not a single Pull out of the Netherland comments? What are you scared of? Just say it out loud, or I will help you

Pull out of the Netherland!.

It is only a 15M population country. A rounding error in Apple's bottom line. You guys should be pushing for this.

Multiple idiots have called for this. Read on.

 

[amartinez1660]

Multiple SKUs are a common practice in the hardware/software industry. It doesn't really make sense for the ACM to try and say that Apple giving developers the ability to have a separate SKU of their dating app with 3rd party payments isn't a serious proposal.

Exactly, I don’t get it. I bet the dev team themselves have tons of versioning systems they handle already… it’s a dating App, there must be some A/B testing, User Acquisition tests, server backend switches, see what works over a sample of people which have some features a tad different than others, iterate and evolve, repeat forever.

Video game companies, we have these “import” Japanese version of some games for those that want the original japanese experience…

At a larger scale, here in Quebec every single product or feature has to have a French language version, marketed and offered under the same conditions as an English one. Corporate emails are written double, the French version with a title add-on that says “(English follows)” to convey that it comes again next in English form. MacBooks? French and English keyboards. Windows laptops/desktops? Preinstalled French unless otherwise asked for the English one. Want some fried chicken from KFC? Here it’s called PFK (Poulet Frit Kentucky, this one makes me chuckle every single time).

I don’t quite get what’s the huge deal about having two executables of the same service.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Oh there is? Can you name any good ones for iOS apps?

The poster said:
“the problem is that it is the ONLY App Store”
It’s not the only App Store. No mention of iOS.

 

[FreedomPenguin]

Meh. I hope apple keeps being apple. I personally rather apple be above Netherlands law, must be so bad in Netherlands to focus on dating apps.

Yeah, apple own Netherlands, pull out if they get dumb. We don’t care about them anyway. Small change for them, only 15 mil peeps.

Imo. I wouldn’t waste time on them if they want to not try and make fair laws.

Apple>>>Netherlands all day baby. Wish apple would buy a country and let me move to it.

 

[ksec]

Multiple idiots have called for this. Read on.

Nah. Not a day I could stomach that much macrumor comments. Glad to know they are here though XD

 

[dk001]

What arrogance? The ACM ordered Apple to allow for third party payments — Apple presented a solution — the ACM didn’t like it. Who is not being serious about this? Did the order specify what the solution should look like? My guess is that the ACM doesn’t know what they want — so how is Apple supposed to comply with this supposed law? The politicians don’t understand the technology, so they don’t get that the solution that was offered gave them what they asked for.

I must be missing something. Why this "new" solution? Apple already has these types of apps in the App Store.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

I must be missing something. Why this "new" solution? Apple already has these types of apps in the App Store.

Apple was ordered to allow for third party payments in dating apps. They came up with a system where the developer saves the transaction fee (3%), so instead of 30%, the commission becomes 27%. This was a solution. I don’t believe it was specified how this was all supposed to be implemented. So why should Apple spend anymore time coming up with another solution that will probably end up being rejected? The ACM doesn’t know what they want. They don’t understand the technology so this is all a game to them.

 

[Yammabot]

If Apple were paying the fines, they can squander their money but it’s the peoples money their throwing away. Customer’s are footing the bill. There must be a better solution.

 

[FreedomPenguin]

If Apple were paying the fines, they can squander their money but it’s the peoples money their throwing away. Customer’s are footing the bill. There must be a better solution.

I think apple should just charge Netherlands higher prices for everything to offset the money lost

I’d be dirty to them.

 

[boss.king]

I think apple should just charge Netherlands higher prices for everything to offset the money lost

I’d be dirty to them.

Spoken like someone who should never be put in charge. You realize that this would trigger much bigger penalties, right? Part of the benefit of the EU is that they won’t allow mega corporations to bully any individual member. If Apple tried to punish the Netherlands, they’ll likely face EU-wide repercussions.

 

[gene731]

Looks like Apple did their homework and came to the conclusion the 50mil will be cheaper in the long run. At least they hope so.
I wonder if Cook was or is involved in this affair.

I would hazard a guess that Mr. Cook would have had to sign off on it. The lawyers at Apple sure have their plate full it seems.

 

[FreedomPenguin]

Spoken like someone who should never be put in charge. You realize that this would trigger much bigger penalties, right? Part of the benefit of the EU is that they won’t allow mega corporations to bully any individual member. If Apple tried to punish the Netherlands, they’ll likely face EU-wide repercussions.

Then I’d collect all the wealth I could sell out and break all macOS and iOS systems and leave the world appleless while I swim in money.

I wouldn’t give to anyone. I applaud apple, they better shove Netherlands down a few levels. Who do they think they are? Pffft

 

[Smooch]

I wouldn’t give to anyone. I applaud apple, they better shove Netherlands down a few levels. Who do they think they are? Pffft

You mean we have a working legal system? Apple just ignores the applicable laws and verdicts?

I just don't get why all the fanboys keep screaming about this specific instance (dating apps in the Netherlands)... It's a goddamn precedence, much more is to come... Apple knows this and evidently tries to postpone this as much as they possibly can.

The whole EU is clearly preparing to make the App Store and the Play Store a much more open marketplace. They did the same for Internet Explorer when it actively hindered innovation and competition. Please don't force americanization on us more than is already happening, thank you.

 

[SoldOnApple]

If Apple couldn't charge money for apps in any way at all I wonder how much more expensive iPhones would be.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Explain to me how Apple can dominate a market without size or market share.

I literally provided an explanation in the comment you responded to.

Here you have it again?

In one of the first Article 82 cases, Hoffmann-La Roche, the European Court of Justice gave the definition of market dominance, which is still used nowadays: “[the dominant position] relates to a position of economic strength enjoyed by an undertaking, which enables it to prevent effective competition being maintained on the relevant market by affording it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors, its customers and ultimately of the consumers. Such a position does not preclude some competition, which it does where there is a monopoly or quasi-monopoly, but enables the undertaking, which profits by it, if not to determine, at least to have an appreciable influence on the conditions under which that competition will develop, and in any case to act largely in disregard of it so long as such conduct does not operate to its detriment”.
The Hoffmann-La Roche delineated also the concept of abuse of a dominant position, as a behaviour “which, through recourse to methods different from those which condition normal competition in products or services on the basis of the transactions of commercial operators, has the effect of hindering the maintenance of the degree of competition still existing in the market or the growth of that competition”.
Abusive behaviour consists mainly of exclusionary practices as predatory pricing, exclusive dealing, refusal to supply, and tying.
It is worthy to emphasize that European law does not punish the dominant position in itself, just its abuse. However, in the practice of European law, a dominant firm might not be allowed to engage in the same practices as non-dominant firms.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Apple was ordered to allow for third party payments in dating apps. They came up with a system where the developer saves the transaction fee (3%), so instead of 30%, the commission becomes 27%. This was a solution. I don’t believe it was specified how this was all supposed to be implemented. So why should Apple spend anymore time coming up with another solution that will probably end up being rejected? The ACM doesn’t know what they want. They don’t understand the technology so this is all a game to them.

They specified what not to do. Apple failed to do so. Apple had months to provide with a solution. They didn’t. Now they are asked every week to provide a solution for review before implementation. Apple is a big boy and don’t need the government to hold its hand in how it should do things

 

[Sophisticatednut]

There are federal standards which must be met no matter what if the product is regulated in any way, and then what is legal to sell in any specific state based on the laws of that state. Some differences are just labeling, others are material due to environmental factors or how controlling the legislature wants to be.

Example: eggs are graded by the federal government for size and quality, but some states only allow eggs from chickens raised in certain ways, or prevent sale of fertile eggs, etc.

Interesting. No member state can prevent sale of eggs for example for for being raised in certain ways if it’s allowed by the EU rules. It would be seen as threatening the single market and protectionist

 

[laptech]

Maybe it is the 27% commission Apple states it is going to collect when using 3rd party payment systems which could be the sticking point. Lets for arguments sake say a dutch dating app developer wants to use Amazon payment system because they want the user to be able to pay with Amazon gift cards, so the app developer codes their app so it gives the user a choice, to use apples payment system or Amazons payment system which if using Amazon's, it has the user leave the app to connect to amazon's payment system so they can pay with Amazon gift cards. Now here's the sticking point, based on this scenerio and what Apple is arguing for it that they are entitled to charge 27% commission on that transaction, even though the transaction is outside of the app and thus has nothing to do with Apple.

 

[laptech]

There are federal standards which must be met no matter what if the product is regulated in any way, and then what is legal to sell in any specific state based on the laws of that state. Some differences are just labeling, others are material due to environmental factors or how controlling the legislature wants to be.

Example: eggs are graded by the federal government for size and quality, but some states only allow eggs from chickens raised in certain ways, or prevent sale of fertile eggs, etc.

Your forgetting, like many other US members posting in here, this is about the EU and as such what ever rules or laws about things you have in the US, they are completely irrelevant when it comes to the EU because their rules and laws are different to the US.

 

[svish]

Looks like the full fine amount of 50 million will be paid by Apple.