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

[0924487]

Yes it is. It is very practical. Managing multiple binaries is not difficult.

It will not create a perfectly competitive market, where Apple directly competes with third party offerings.

 

[0924487]

Get an android. I'd like to do a lot of things in this life also, but I'm limited by the powers to be that govern my life.

You can rephrase that and tell Apple to get bent.

 

[0924487]

I'm guessing you aren't an iPhone user in Europe, or at least you don't want to be a month from now.

Then EU can fine Apple base on Apple’s global turnover up to 80%.

 

[icanhazmac]

They oughta leave the EU.

Better yet, don't pay the fines and force the courts into shutting them down! Then we will see the power of the people when they all revolt over not having access to the app store.

 

[0924487]

They can try, but they won’t succeed.

Apple will soon understand that a fine is a punitive compulsory measure, not a fee that can be negotiated. If not, then their executives will be charged contempt of court.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Easy solution: comply. Let this ONE country be a very public guinea pig. Either:

• Nearly all iPhones in this country will be destroyed by everyone taking advantage of the new option OR
• Some iPhones in this country will be destroyed by some taking advantage of the new option OR
• Nearly nothing will happen and all of the spin about the certain cataclysm that will follow such an option will be seen for what it likely is: far, far overblown.

We ALL have Macs running almost the same OS. Those Macs can buy/install Apps from an iOS-like store completely controlled by Apple or Apps direct from third parties. Are all Macs completely destroyed by us all having that kind of store flexibility already?

How does Apple address this situation on Macs? They pop up a warning about installing apps from unknown sources. Then it's on the Mac owner to proceed or not proceed. If they proceed and the owner is actually installing every computer virus ever created, that's clearly on the owner. Apple could send a "we warned them" notice to itself so that when this person is calling Apple for help, Apple customer service will know that software was installed from questionable sources.

Has the flexibility to purchase Mac Apps from wherever brought all Macs to their knees? Not at all. Have some Macs been compromised by that flexibility? Yes. iOS devices will likely be the same. Most will probably continue to get apps as they do now. Those concerned about safety will continue to get their apps from what they believe is the safest source. Some of those less concerned or too dumb or naive may- in fact- compromise their iDevices.

Here's a chance to show the world how "terrible" it would actually be for a finite group of people to facilitate competition... just like all of us already have with our Macs. If it actually is a disaster, a slice of one relatively small group of people will suffer the consequences, learn from their mistake and not make it again. On the other hand, if iOS goes as macOS is already, the flexibility to purchase from more than one source will likely deliver better prices and more money actually reaching the developers instead of a company already richer than any other.

Before it's forced on Apple by many countries, here's an easy opportunity to prove the disaster... or reveal the hype is false. If disaster, other countries wanting the same may pull back and preserve the "as is." A very simple test will clearly prove it if it will be as spun.

Great post. One problem, Apple might actually do it, and see it as an opportunity to deliberately mess it up so that they can go "See, I told you so."

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

I agree.
My parents already download scammy apps from the app store that don't actually cause any harm or cost them anything, they just have annoying ads.
I can't imagine how bad it'll be if 3rd party app stores are allowed.

Can you imagine how good though?!

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Only problem is there are Mac apps that aren't available through the Mac store that I need for work.

I have to have those apps for my livelihood, end of story. And I can guarantee that the developers of those apps want my money.

So it would be nice if developers were Forced (cause we know most developers aren't changing unless forced to) to use the APP store and it's guidelines to make sure I'm getting a secure as possible APP.

Really? Really? You actually really have a problem with buying the software direct from the companies that produce the software you need for your work? Come off it. That's like saying I refuse to buy my beer directly from the brewery that makes it, because I can't trust them as much as the bottle shop that I'm used to buying it from.

 

[Wildkraut]

Good statement…

“Only a monopolist would prefer to pay €50 million in fines instead of outright complying with the rule of law,” said Rick VanMeter, the executive director of the Coalition for App Fairness”

 

[eifelbube]

While I can grasp your thinking, I would not want Mac developers forced to sell through only a single source at all. Pinching competition down to 1 source is almost always bad for consumers. Yes, there could very well be a net security positive but it would bring a lot of negatives.

As is, we can buy through the Mac store and only the Mac store if we like. Or we can buy third party... or get some apps in 1X-app bundles for $10, etc. We can KNOW we are taking added risk from NOT buying only from Apple but it's up to us as owners of our computers to decide to take that risk or not. If we do and we make a huge mistake, that's not Apple's fault- they even WARN us when we want to install something from outside sources.

But again, we don't even need to debate this. Here's a perfect opportunity for Apple to PROVE the disaster of making the iOS store more like the macOS store, focused on only a single country... who through monthly fines have "forced Apple into the action" (so that if it IS a disaster Apple can both claim "I told you so" AND "you forced this upon yourselves... the only option now is to destroy those infected iDevices and buy brand new ones. Cha-chinnnnnng!").

It would show everyone else in the world the absolute devastation and misery caused by doing this- just as we Mac users all suffer utter cataclysms by having this purchasing flexibility now- and thus make everyone else back off of similar demands. Think of if as a consumer beta test, isolated to a single group that may turn out to be a good thing, no thing or a potential extinction event. It's so, soooooo nice of Apple to try to protect the Dutch from the ramifications of this terrible want... but sometimes you simply have to let the baby touch a hot stove to learn about getting burned.

Hard proof in a smallish test like that would be much more valuable to the cause than the easy perception of "protect our cash cow" spin. Best of all, a test like that would have NO effect at all on the entire rest of the world even if it manages to sink the whole country like Atlantis... or summon fire & brimstone... or locusts... or the 4 horsemen.

I agree. It is mostly about protecting the cash cow, less about protecting security. The AppStore is a significant cash cow, otherwise Apple could not afford to gift the Dutch government $5M every week.

 

[visualseed]

I seriously think when the all the facts come out we will find out that the ACM overstepped and is trying to pull a PR stunt and Apple just called their bluff. Unfortunately, that will happen in a few years after it winds its way thought the legal system and everyone has forgotten about this.

 

[visualseed]

Dunno about the U.S. but not here in the EU.
Thats why every contract has a salvatory clause, to not render the whole contract invalid in case somebody challenges a passage of it and win.

Just like Adobe, Microsofts OEM Windows Eula resell restrictions has been challenged and rendered invalid by law here. We can freely resell OEM Windows and Adobe Software.

Selling OEM Windows copies – you can do it in Europe

According to this reading of the law, anyway

www.theregister.com

That's beside the point. Even in the US some jurisdictions can render terms of the contract illegal or unenforceable. But it would be true of any kind of contract, therefore they usually add a clause that states everything else is still valid to cover their butts. But that has nothing to with the overall binding/enforceability of "click-wrap" contracts. These are just term specific things that may not be allowed under law currently or in the future that they want to mitigate against.

The original poster argued that these contracts were not enforceable because they did not represent a "meeting of the minds" and this is just not true.

 

[coolfactor]

Apple can either “comply with all laws in countries that we operate” (Tim Cook’s words) or they can pay the price. They have no problem following all laws and regulations in authoritarian countries like China for some reason. ?

I'm not sure why this point keeps being raised. Weren't the laws changed *after* the App Store went live? The entire App Store ecosystem is built on YEARS of evolutionary improvement, and yet the Netherlands want that changed overnight. It's completely unreasonable and Apple is not at fault.

 

[PortoMavericks]

I agree.
My parents already download scammy apps from the app store that don't actually cause any harm or cost them anything, they just have annoying ads.
I can't imagine how bad it'll be if 3rd party app stores are allowed.

The world shouldn't pay for your parents lack of knowledge.

 

[visualseed]

I'm not sure why this point keeps being raised. Weren't the laws changed *after* the App Store went live? The entire App Store ecosystem is built on YEARS of evolutionary improvement, and yet the Netherlands want that changed overnight. It's completely unreasonable and Apple is not at fault.

Not only that, challenging laws, appealing decisions, and protesting against while trying to change laws a company (or person) thinks are unfair is also following the law. If laws were final and absolute there would be no need for courts. The reason why Apple usually appears to cave in China, is there there is very little public process or opportunity to challenge laws or verdicts. Most is usually done behind closed doors and in secret and the first the world learns of it is at the end of the matter.

 

[ouimetnick]

I'm not sure why this point keeps being raised. Weren't the laws changed *after* the App Store went live? The entire App Store ecosystem is built on YEARS of evolutionary improvement, and yet the Netherlands want that changed overnight. It's completely unreasonable and Apple is not at fault.

Doesn’t matter if the laws were changed overnight. Apple either complies or they don’t. Pretty sure the Chinese law requiring their citizens data be stored in mainland China was passed after iCloud existed. Cook and Co happily complied.

 

[pacalis]

At this point Apple should just pull all the dating apps off the Netherlands app store.

That should be the path forward everywhere. The company shouldn't be forced to distribute products and services it doesn't make money from.

 

[visualseed]

Really? Really? You actually really have a problem with buying the software direct from the companies that produce the software you need for your work? Come off it. That's like saying I refuse to buy my beer directly from the brewery that makes it, because I can't trust them as much as the bottle shop that I'm used to buying it from.

I have had more luck with customer service buying from experienced retail stores than direct from developers or manufactures. Competence in one field does not translate to competence in other fields no matter how closely related you think they are. It only takes a few minutes to peek at sone of the websites of some app developers in the App Store to realize this. Thankfully, Apple stated enforcing SSL on URLs for privacy policies and help pages or many of these sites would not even have that.

 

[The Cappy]

Easy solution: comply. Let this ONE country be a very public guinea pig. Either:

• Nearly all iPhones in this country will be destroyed by everyone taking advantage of the new option OR
• Some iPhones in this country will be destroyed by some taking advantage of the new option OR
• Nearly nothing will happen and all of the spin about the certain cataclysm that will follow such an option will be seen for what it likely is: far, far overblown.

We ALL have Macs running almost the same OS. Those Macs can buy/install Apps from an iOS-like store completely controlled by Apple or Apps direct from third parties. Are all Macs completely destroyed by us all having that kind of store flexibility already?

How does Apple address this situation on Macs? They pop up a warning about installing apps from unknown sources. Then it's on the Mac owner to proceed or not proceed. If they proceed and the owner is actually installing every computer virus ever created, that's clearly on the owner. Apple could send a "we warned them" notice to itself so that when this person is calling Apple for help, Apple customer service will know that software was installed from questionable sources.

Has the flexibility to purchase Mac Apps from wherever brought all Macs to their knees? Not at all. Have some Macs been compromised by that flexibility? Yes. iOS devices will likely be the same. Most will probably continue to get apps as they do now. Those concerned about safety will continue to get their apps from what they believe is the safest source. Some of those less concerned or too dumb or naive may- in fact- compromise their iDevices.

Here's a chance to show the world how "terrible" it would actually be for a finite group of people to facilitate competition... just like all of us already have with our Macs. If it actually is a disaster, a slice of one relatively small group of people will suffer the consequences, learn from their mistake and not make it again. On the other hand, if iOS goes as macOS is already, the flexibility to purchase from more than one source will likely deliver better prices and more money actually reaching the developers instead of a company already richer than any other.

Before it's forced on Apple by many countries, here's an easy opportunity to prove the disaster... or reveal the hype is false. If disaster, other countries wanting the same may pull back and preserve the "as is." A very simple test will clearly prove it if it will be as spun.

That's a very shallow take, tbh. The malware problem won't necessarily happen if only Denmark does this. Too small a market to attract the serious malware actors. But If Denmark gets its way, every country will shortly get its way. And then the malware situation on iOS will quickly approach or exceed that on the Mac, which Apple has previously pointed out it considers too high. "The law of unintended consequences being the one law politicians always pass," to paraphrase the late PJ O'Rourke.

 

[boyarka]

Muricans: Free Market is the foundation of a sound financial system as it does away with monopolies and allow everyone to compete.

Also muricans: NOOO!!!! It's unfair to allow apps for a phone someone owns to be available except trough this one single source! What do you mean "alternative payments"? If you don't want to pay trough this one company for the same app this one company allows to exist then go to communist china and use an Android phone!!11!!! My AAPL stock!!!!111

 

[visualseed]

Muricans: Free Market is the foundation of a sound financial system as it does away with monopolies and allow everyone to compete.

Also muricans: NOOO!!!! It's unfair to allow apps for a phone someone owns to be available except trough this one single source! What do you mean "alternative payments"? If you don't want to pay trough this one company for the same app this one company allows to exist then go to communist china and use an Android phone!!11!!! My AAPL stock!!!!111

Europeans: Have cake

Also Europeans: Eat the cake too

 

[icanhazmac]

Muricans: Free Market is the foundation of a sound financial system as it does away with monopolies and allow everyone to compete.

Also muricans: NOOO!!!! It's unfair to allow apps for a phone someone owns to be available except trough this one single source! What do you mean "alternative payments"? If you don't want to pay trough this one company for the same app this one company allows to exist then go to communist china and use an Android phone!!11!!! My AAPL stock!!!!111

Wow, I see what you did there with the "Muricans" thing... so witty.

Explain for us all please why the free market cannot contain two distinctly different examples of app markets? One where everything is contained in a "one stop shop" and one where you have all the freedom you want? Why should governments get involved in this and regulate one ecosystem out of existence? Why not let the free market decide which it likes better? If one ecosystem loses too many users because of their practices they will either adapt or fail. Or perhaps, just perhaps, both can exist, then users have real choice.

 

[goobot]

Muricans: Free Market is the foundation of a sound financial system as it does away with monopolies and allow everyone to compete.

Also muricans: NOOO!!!! It's unfair to allow apps for a phone someone owns to be available except trough this one single source! What do you mean "alternative payments"? If you don't want to pay trough this one company for the same app this one company allows to exist then go to communist china and use an Android phone!!11!!! My AAPL stock!!!!111

We should force stores to sell what products we want on their shelves at the price we want too, sports stadiums shouldn’t be allow to exist with full control of the stores within it, we should be allowed to put PlayStation disks in our Xbox, ect. Why is only apple being targeted?

 

[Sciomar]

One company can ban whoever they want from having a voice on their platform and another cannot govern how their own hardware/software operate. Some great mental gymnastics there.

 

[dk001]

We should force stores to sell what products we want on their shelves at the price we want too, sports stadiums shouldn’t be allow to exist with full control of the stores within it, we should be allowed to put PlayStation disks in our Xbox, ect. Why is only apple being targeted?

It isn't only Apple. They just are the current limelight kid.