Apple's Fines in Dutch Antitrust Case Hit 50 Million Euros

[applicious84]

I guess you don’t like paying taxes… move to Dubai or some other low tax area then?

The point I'm making is that if everything isn't perfect, you can try to fix what isn't working for you or deal with it, but you don't have to leave/abandon everything over a few issues. Courts and legislation are one example of seeking a fix. Working things out with your partner might be better than getting a divorce. You could also agree to stay together and see other people. There are lots of ways. Also, if you don't like a tax system, you could just deal with it if you otherwise need or want to live in your country. You could also file a lawsuit or petition a rep.

Lots of people here say, just go to android, when someone mentions that they're not completely satisfied with everything about Apple's phone and services, and that seems trivial and dismissive. Maybe they should go to a different forum if they don't like everything people are saying here.

The approach in the Netherlands is the courts. Apple can work through them, consider their losses and stay, or leave the country and deal with how the rest of the EU might react. Lots of choices, but knee jerk reactions, like just go somewhere else...well that's what some people choose to say, and they can do the same.

 

[goobot]

I think you are missing his point. Yes, that is ANY store you go into. But in your scenario, there is only ONE store. I'll try this example. I use a cleaner called Method. It is not sold at Walmart. I don't need to argue why Walmart doesn't carry it. I can get it at Target's, Lowes, etc. If I want an app for Iphone, I have ONE choice of store. I believe that is the point he is making.

Yea except you can go and get an android so there is another store

 

[ct2k7]

Yea except you can go and get an android so there is another store

Yeah, no.

Every time this gets brought up, I wonder if people are arguing in bad faith or if they fundamentally don’t understand what they are saying.

 

[dk001]

Yeah, no.

Every time this gets brought up, I wonder if people are arguing in bad faith or if they fundamentally don’t understand what they are saying.

Perhaps they are rationalizing their viewpoint?

 

[I7guy]

Yeah, no.

Every time this gets brought up, I wonder if people are arguing in bad faith or if they fundamentally don’t understand what they are saying.

Fundamentally that is the underlying concepts of capitalism. So no, they aren’t arguing in bad faith and understand fully what they are saying.

 

[ct2k7]

Fundamentally that is the underlying concepts of capitalism. So no, they aren’t arguing in bad faith and understand fully what they are saying.

Ok, but we have been over why “just buy an android device” isn’t really an equitable position, in several different formats.

Moreover, the regulatory climate is different in the EU/NL compared to Apple’s homeland.

 

[I7guy]

Ok, but we have been over why “just buy an android device” isn’t really an equitable position, in several different formats.

Moreover, the regulatory climate is different in the EU/NL compared to Apple’s homeland.

Whether the regulatory climate is different or not, the fundamental principles of vote with your dollars always apply. Several examples, such as Blackberry come to mind in that regard. And like death and taxes I am not in control, I am not in favor of this bit of legislation either. YMMV.

 

[Johns12]

Whether the regulatory climate is different or not, the fundamental principles of vote with your dollars always apply. Several examples, such as Blackberry come to mind in that regard. And like death and taxes I am not in control, I am not in favor of this bit of legislation either. YMMV.

The vote with your dollars argument would hold much more weight if it actually existed. Google, who is in trouble also, has done everything in it's power to force you to buy from the Play Store. People on this site make constant claims about the train wreak of Android and the open and virus filled place it is, but just taking a second you could find that the majority of apps on Android are purchased from the Play Store. They are not sideloaded. Pretty much and for the most part IOS and Android have a similar setup. You can question Googles oversight of apps and I wouldn't argue that, but they stack the cards in their favor for the App Store.

 

[AppliedMicro]

No big tech is going to want to deploy any tech to the EU.

Reality will prove that wrong.

They said the same about the EU‘s GDPR - yet that didn’t stop big tech from deploying and making money in Europe.

Neither did the Chinese stop Apple from deploying iCloud to the mainland. Apple were happy enough to hand over iCloud to a chinese (government-controlled, I read) contractor.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Yes they do, maybe not the electric company you use. As your Cable/TV provider maybe located in another providers area. However, that company needs electricity. Which costs the cable provider along with all the costs of the content they resell to you. All of that is factored into your bill. Plus profit of course, and taxes etc.

My cable company pays for electricity provided by the kilowatt/hour, according to market prices.
Not as a percentage of their revenue.
Big difference.

Those costs, again are passed on to the purchase prices of everything you may buy from them. fractions of a cent here and there, but you do pay for it. For there to be some "cut" on top of that of which you or Amazon would pay makes no sense. You're both paying already

Again: Are Amazon charged and paying for their their electricity and data pipes a share of their revenue?
They don’t.
Big difference.

Come up with an alternative then

Sure: let‘s prevent companies that enjoy such gatekeeping power from enforcing revenue sharing on their customers.
We can do that by mandating them to allow sideloading or prohibiting them to charge commissions based on revenue.

 

[I7guy]

Reality will prove that wrong.

We'll see about that.

They said the same about the EU‘s GDPR - yet that didn’t stop big tech from deploying and making money in Europe.

GDPR is an annoyance more than anything else.

Neither did the Chinese stop Apple from deploying iCloud to the mainland. Apple were happy enough to hand over iCloud to a chinese (government-controlled, I read) contractor.

Did they hand over the source code or the operation?

 

[gregmancuso]

Yeah, no.

Every time this gets brought up, I wonder if people are arguing in bad faith or if they fundamentally don’t understand what they are saying.

I don't say this but I can understand the reasoning.

The fact is there are current two platform choices - one current wide open (Android) and one closed (iOS). This is well known and people buying into one platform or the other are aware of the choice they are making.

By forcing Apple to open iOS to allows everything you can get on Android eliminates one of the platform choices. You will still have two OS vendors to choose from but only one platform choice.

There will no longer be a platform option with controls and a walled garden. And everyone is affected by that in a negative fashion. The argument that opening iOS increases choice for end users is a fallacy. This will effectively turn iOS into Android, remove the platform differentiator, and provide choices to a handful of larger developers at the expense of all consumers.

That said, I'd welcome the alternate payment options. So long as Apple's IAP is always an option. That is a choice that may be of benefit to consumers. I am not in favor of wide open side-loading or alternate stores. Even if I choose not to use them the versions of apps on this stores likely will not have the controls that Apple tries to enforce in the App Store versions. If one of my contacts uses an app from am alternative source and that app has issues (malware, privacy, etc.) then I am potentially also affected as my information or interactions may be gathered from the contact's side. And if the issue is more nefarious there could be other implications. The idea that a bad acting app will limit itself to only the phone that installed it is naive.

 

[visualseed]

Sure, they can charge for their development SDK or membership.

Charging percentage royalties on commercial sales of finished products and systems has been an acceptable way to get paid for IP since pretty much forever. Many of the same people that wanted Apple to pay through the nose for patents they use in their products seem to want to use Apple's IP in their's for free or next to nothing.

 

[djphat2000]

My cable company pays for electricity provided by the kilowatt/hour, according to market prices.
Not as a percentage of their revenue.
Big difference.

You're still paying for it in your bill. And you have zero say in how much that price is or are even able to find out what that price is. If they are uncharging you or over charging etc for it. Everything that company has to pay for is factored into the customers bill.

Again: Are Amazon charged and paying for their their electricity and data pipes a share of their revenue?
They don’t.
Big difference.

That wasn't the deal that was struck for Appstores. So no. But, any manufacture/developer selling in a store wants a certain amount for their product/services. And the store has to make money. They are entitled to do so. If the developer wants to make more on a given sale, they can raise the price accordingly. Or if Apple/Google want to (and have), they can lower the commission they make. So far I have not seen prices on the commission EVER go up. Only go down.

By the way, has that reflected in the prices of apps in the store? I mean, have you seen a reduction in prices on the store for those developers that have been charged less? I'm willing to bet no.

Sure: let‘s prevent companies that enjoy such gatekeeping power from enforcing revenue sharing on their customers.
We can do that by mandating them to allow sideloading or prohibiting them to charge commissions based on revenue.

Did Apple just get gatekeeping power? Like did they start off that way, or did they create a business the right way?
Why do we have to make them sound evil, or guilty or wrong when they aren't that in this instance at the least of any of that. The EU has defined them as such, and are crafting rules and regulations that place Apple in that position. Because no law was broken, and no rules bent. They are a business, they laid out the rules for everyone to see and know well ahead of signing up. No one had to develop for the iPhone. It was not mandated by any government or person in power. They chose to do so of their own free will. Developers got rich, and so did Apple. And the machine kept moving forward. Apple makes more innovative things for people to buy. Devs get to create new and innovative apps. Now, Dev's are pissed cause 30% too high.

Like I said before. Give the EU a version of iOS that has nothing on it. You side load everything. Apple will fix iOS as in patch and ensure it works as they should. What you do on your phone in the EU is all up to you.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Charging percentage royalties on commercial sales of finished products and systems has been an acceptable way to get paid for IP since pretty much forever.

So has competition law and its enforcement.

Many of the same people that wanted Apple to pay through the nose for patents they use in their products seem to want to use Apple's IP in their's for free or next to nothing.

As a matter of fact, Apple are giving it away (almost) for free.
You can use their IP all the way you want in free apps.

That wasn't the deal that was struck for Appstores

It indeed wasn't.
The issue that there's almost no available deals, as there's too little competition in (relevant) App Stores.

Did Apple just get gatekeeping power? (...) no law was broken, and no rules bent

They didn't have that forever. And it wasn't as relevant years ago as it is today (with the increased importance of mobile apps).

Companies become more powerful - and democratically elected governments will react with new laws to curtail that power. Happens all the time (only... the EU isn't really democratically elected).

It's not about breaking existing laws.
Laws are made to achieve a desired economic and/or societal effect.

Like I said before. Give the EU a version of iOS that has nothing on it. You side load everything. Apple will fix iOS as in patch and ensure it works as they should. What you do on your phone in the EU is all up to you.

There'll still be people that want to download most or all (exclusively) their apps from Apple's App Store.
These forums and threads in fact seem quite full of them - and they're even willing to pay a premium for that.

It'd just be dumb for Apple not to cater to these people by offering an App Store in the EU.
There millions, probably of hundreds of millions of dollars to be made.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Doesn't cap the earnings. It states that after a certain amount, your getting regulated by these rules. I believe 75 billion euro's was the number. You get classified differently. So at that point everything you did gets thrown out the window and you have to do it this way now. If your Apple in this instance. That iOS you wrote, re-write it so it works the way we (EU) want. You made too much, you're too big, so how you did it before no longer applies.

And no, it's not good. It's only good if you never intend and can prevent your business from making that much. Which is basically capping that business. As they would not want to cross that number hence having to then change their business because of how much they made.

If I'm Apple, an easy way round this is to cap how much I make in the EU. So I stay under it. I limit my services and how many/much I sell my devices for. I don't want to be a gatekeeper. I want to be just good enough to not be on this new list. I could raise prices so less people buy my stuff, but I still make good money. And I don't have to change a thing. Because being less popular in the EU is now a benefit. I slow roll any new products in the EU. That iPhone 14, yeah your going to get that in April of the following year. And there will only be X number sold. No matter the demand for it. I'll make up for it in other nations that don't have these ridiculous laws or artificial caps on earnings. I'll sell them a cheaper phone and flood the market. The SE will not be available in the EU for example, I'll sell it in South America or Africa.

• €7.5 billion in annual revenue and market capitalization of €75 billion. An organization also needs to have at least 45 million monthly end users and 10,000 yearly business users to be identified as a gatekeeper.

These are the requirements to be classified as a gate keeper.

They don’t charge you a higher tax or limit your profits. But instead they must now allow more competition and more r

Restricting gatekeepers from requiring business users of their core platform services to make use of their payment service platforms

restrict gatekeepers from combining data across platform services, unless consent has been obtained in an explicit and clear manner in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation

requiring gatekeepers to enable interoperability between messaging services to a limited extent. In that regard, messaging platforms will have to provide interoperability with competitors for one-to-one conversations between users, but not for group chats at least initially.

the Commission is ready to “fully engage” with “anyone” on what the DMA means for their business and has in place an “open door policy”.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Did Apple just get gatekeeping power? Like did they start off that way, or did they create a business the right way?
Why do we have to make them sound evil, or guilty or wrong when they aren't that in this instance at the least of any of that. The EU has defined them as such, and are crafting rules and regulations that place Apple in that position. Because no law was broken, and no rules bent. They are a business, they laid out the rules for everyone to see and know well ahead of signing up. No one had to develop for the iPhone. It was not mandated by any government or person in power. They chose to do so of their own free will. Developers got rich, and so did Apple. And the machine kept moving forward. Apple makes more innovative things for people to buy. Devs get to create new and innovative apps. Now, Dev's are pissed cause 30% too high.

Of course they didn’t start as gate keepers, that is why they use an objective clear cut definition to prevent harms more effectively. The foundation of the DMA bill is based on existing Supreme Court rulings, existing laws and regulations. Court cases where practices have been used to skirt the ruling with cleaver changes and Discoveries found when probing google and Microsoft etc of anti competitive practices that have been dragged in courts and found guilty and evidence of harm to the market and users.

Currently apple is being probed for anti competitive behavior over suspected criminal acts in regard to anti competitive behavior and abuse. They have lost in court multiple times over different issues in local governments such as France and Germany.

The DMA is essentially a clear guideline, harmonization of laws and tailor-made legal tools to make things as objective and clear as possible to eliminate the need to have a court interpret and rule on every instance and make it clear what dominant companies must comply with.

This is just a big anti competitive bill reform for the modern age

Like I said before. Give the EU a version of iOS that has nothing on it. You side load everything. Apple will fix iOS as in patch and ensure it works as they should. What you do on your phone in the EU is all up to you.

Or just provide it with less restrictions for and a gatekeeper toggle. Plus AppStore should use Apple Pay instead

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Companies become more powerful - and democratically elected governments will react with new laws to curtail that power. Happens all the time (only... the EU isn't really democratically elected).

well I would dispute that claim heavily. It’s absolutely more democratic than the USA for example, and have more fairly elected representatives

 

[djphat2000]

• €7.5 billion in annual revenue and market capitalization of €75 billion. An organization also needs to have at least 45 million monthly end users and 10,000 yearly business users to be identified as a gatekeeper.

These are the requirements to be classified as a gate keeper.

Which I understood. And intemperate as "Don't get too successful in the EU". 75 billion market cap, are they serious?
If Tesla (Elon) creates a Social media platform, they would instantly be a gatekeeper.

They don’t charge you a higher tax or limit your profits. But instead they must now allow more competition and more r

Tell me how they prevented it in the first place. This may work fine for Meta (Facebook). And just proves my point that they (EU) don't know what they are doing. Not like Facebook hasn't bought up all these SM companies forever now. Just deciding to catch up?

Restricting gatekeepers from requiring business users of their core platform services to make use of their payment service platforms

Still get to charge a Fee/Commission anyway. Removing the requirement saves them maybe 3%.

restrict gatekeepers from combining data across platform services, unless consent has been obtained in an explicit and clear manner in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation

This is fine.

requiring gatekeepers to enable interoperability between messaging services to a limited extent.

So sending a text/SMS isn't enough? You have to have WhatsApp message iMessage or send a standard SMS? They care that much about emoji's?

In that regard, messaging platforms will have to provide interoperability with competitors for one-to-one conversations between users, but not for group chats at least initially.

Again, not knowing what they want it to do or how it works. So I ask again, do they not have the ability to text each other by default between iOS/Android/etc? Do they truly need Facebook messenger to text directly to WhatsApp or any other combination?

the Commission is ready to “fully engage” with “anyone” on what the DMA means for their business and has in place an “open door policy”.

Yeah sure. Why don't they fully engage in some computer/programing related classes for a few years first.

 

[visualseed]

As a matter of fact, Apple are giving it away (almost) for free.
You can use their IP all the way you want in free apps.

So the law is if you give anything to charity, you have to give everything to charity.? I do believe Apple was pretty clear that if you don‘t make money on your apps, they won’t charge you. 30% of zero is still zero.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Which I understood. And intemperate as "Don't get too successful in the EU". 75 billion market cap, are they serious?
If Tesla (Elon) creates a Social media platform, they would instantly be a gatekeeper.

No, you need to meet every requirements in EU. Outside of EU doesn’t affect this.

Tell me how they prevented it in the first place. This may work fine for Meta (Facebook). And just proves my point that they (EU) don't know what they are doing. Not like Facebook hasn't bought up all these SM companies forever now. Just deciding to catch up?

With existing anti competitive laws. Why do you think google was fined in total over 10 billion euros Over the last 10 years?

Still get to charge a Fee/Commission anyway. Removing the requirement saves them maybe 3%.

We will se, that is covered by other anti competitive laws covering everyone. So we will se after the probe in to apple is finished.

So sending a text/SMS isn't enough? You have to have WhatsApp message iMessage or send a standard SMS? They care that much about emoji's?

iMessages basic function is communicating encrypted. Emoji isn’t a basic function as sms already supports it. Why shouldn’t you be able to communicate between WhatsApp and iMessage?

Again, not knowing what they want it to do or how it works. So I ask again, do they not have the ability to text each other by default between iOS/Android/etc? Do they truly need Facebook messenger to text directly to WhatsApp or any other combination?

It’s because WhatsApp and messenger etc have a dominating position and fracturing them to isolated groups unable to communicate isn’t desired or good.

Yeah sure. Why don't they fully engage in some computer/programing related classes for a few years first.

They do. The commission is made up of 10.000 civil servants employed according to merit with relevant expertise constructing regulations in their fields they actually have the competence For. Then they write laws and regulations for elected politicians to negotiate on and finally vote on. Simplified
Eu council = 27 heads of state negotiate andapprove it
Eu parliament= 705 representatives negotiate and vote on it


They also require unanimous support in parliament to be approved to work on the commission of ruling coalition president

 

[Sophisticatednut]

One of these companies, one does not have a vested interest in mining my data. It's also the one currently providing the oversight for Apps on my device.

Apple have a vested interest in your data, apples big growing revenue stream is services. You should never trust a service provider to self regulate when they have economical incentives to do the opposite.

As the extremely big flaws in the “review” process have shown over the years.

And I'd agree, there should be oversight. However I do not believe there is any government currently with the budget or manpower capable of providing such a service. And of course it would need to be the government in every country that has an App Store.

The oversight already exist in every EU state. We have had these centralized institutions for decades

Or we could have an independent organization doing the vetting according to security and privacy requirements etc etc. so far apple is the best because that’s what they claim.

It is a Standard thing that exist, perhaps USA needs to update its regulatory body.

Knowing the way governments operate they would probably:

• Charge App Developers $500 as a vetting fee for all new Apps on the market.
• Outsource the vetting of Apps to Apple / Google anyhow and pay them for doing what they are already doing for free, and of course pocket the rest.

Do you not think that until such time as Apple change their policy's towards data protection, that they are probably in the best position to provide that oversight for iOS Apps ?

That explains why the us government is broken. Eu governments currently vets everyone’s taxes for zero costs and provide it to you to control or add missing information before it’s completely controlled and verified.

Steam works fine, Microsoft works fine. Eu overall works fine with data regulators and legal accountability. Apple isn’t any better than anyone else

 

[I7guy]

Apple have a vested interest in your data, apples big growing revenue stream is services. You should never trust a service provider to self regulate when they have economical incentives to do the opposite.

Apple could do what we they want to my data except give it or sell it away.

As the extremely big flaws in the “review” process have shown over the years.

Is anything perfect. But that doesn’t mean throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The oversight already exist in every EU state. We have had these centralized institutions for decades

Or we could have an independent organization doing the vetting according to security and privacy requirements etc etc. so far apple is the best because that’s what they claim.

It is a Standard thing that exist, perhaps USA needs to update its regulatory body.

That explains why the us government is broken. Eu governments currently vets everyone’s taxes for zero costs and provide it to you to control or add missing information before it’s completely controlled and verified.

Steam works fine, Microsoft works fine. Eu overall works fine with data regulators and legal accountability. Apple isn’t any better than anyone else

We’ll I think apple is a cut above the other companies. Ymmv.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Apple could do what we they want to my data except give it or sell it away.

I’d rather they gave me that option to chose. My data is still my property

Is anything perfect. But that doesn’t mean throwing the baby out with the bath water.

as they say, don’t put all your eggs in one basket. Let’s expand that option to more choices. I would love if someone with even more privacy in mind.

We’ll I think apple is a cut above the other companies. Ymmv.

Well there is nothing to prove this. Apple is in the same league as Valve, just more puritan and afraid of spicy politics and adult content.

 

[djphat2000]

No, you need to meet every requirements in EU. Outside of EU doesn’t affect this.

So long as you're not in the EU as in "based"? So Meta should just move out of the EU and base them selves solely in the US.

With existing anti competitive laws. Why do you think google was fined in total over 10 billion euros Over the last 10 years?

Pennies. This is a Multi Trillion dollar company.

We will se, that is covered by other anti competitive laws covering everyone. So we will se after the probe in to apple is finished.

They can take their time. Seems to be what they do best.

iMessages basic function is communicating encrypted. Emoji isn’t a basic function as sms already supports it. Why shouldn’t you be able to communicate between WhatsApp and iMessage?

Because someone thought it might be a good idea to try something different? I mean, should we not have options? Different ways of doing things? Why "should" they communicate between them? What makes them special or unique if they all communicate with each other? I want to sell you something that is different from the others. Yes, they all communicate, but the don't have to do it the same way or be compatible to each other. Like why isn't Windows OS and macOS compatible? Or Android and iOS, and so on. If I have to make my product work with other business products. I can't innovate without still working with all these other options. What if what I want to do will break that compatibility? I can't do it? This sounds like the USB-C for all mobile devices all over again.

It’s because WhatsApp and messenger etc have a dominating position and fracturing them to isolated groups unable to communicate isn’t desired or good.

Again, we blame the companies for being successful. Not the consumer that bought into one app or the other.
Sometimes to beat that dominance is for someone else to do it better. Not break them up "IF" they have done nothing wrong.

They do. The commission is made up of 10.000 civil servants employed according to merit with relevant expertise constructing regulations in their fields they actually have the competence For. Then they write laws and regulations for elected politicians to negotiate on and finally vote on. Simplified
Eu council = 27 heads of state negotiate andapprove it
Eu parliament= 705 representatives negotiate and vote on it


They also require unanimous support in parliament to be approved to work on the commission of ruling coalition president

Sounds impressive. It even looks impressive. I'm not impressed, as the end result here is the same. Anti-capitalism, and bias against American companies.