Court Upholds Regulator's Case Against Apple Over App Store

[Sophisticatednut]

But epic largely lost and the case is in appeal.

Considering they are back in the store and can sell vbucks and keep 100% it seems the opposite.

Especially with every developer can now do that as well.

It’s unfortunate eu is playing in bad faith. As I said Apple, google and meta should leave the eu. They’ll have to regulate Spotify because that’s what’s left.

No evidence EU is bad faith. The rules are clear regarding the effects you can’t have.
So Apple can play around with the formulae as much as they want but the result must be with the regulations states.

 

[I7guy]

Considering they are back in the store and can sell vbucks and keep 100% it seems the opposite.

Especially with every developer can now do that as well.

There is still an appeal, but they still largely lost.

No evidence EU is bad faith. The rules are clear regarding the effects you can’t have.
So Apple can play around with the formulae as much as they want but the result must be with the regulations states.

No the rules aren’t clear and meeting the “letter of the law” is a moving target.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

There is still an appeal, but they still largely lost.

No the rules aren’t clear and meeting the “letter of the law” is a moving target.

The letter of the law =/= intent of the law.
Apple is meeting neither of them. And you can confirm this by reading their arguments as well as implementation.

Are clearly 100% black and white in violation of the law.

The intent limits the literal interpretation you can’t make

 

[I7guy]

The letter of the law =/= intent of the law.
Apple is meeting neither of them. And you can confirm this by reading their arguments as well as implementation.

Are clearly 100% black and white in violation of the law.

The intent limits the literal interpretation you can’t make

There is no letter of the law in the eu. The DMA made it so convoluted this is the mess that ensured. You didn’t think Apple was going to give up without a fight?

As far as the US one never knows. Remember the FaceTime bug lawsuit. Most Apple critics thought Apple would go down and instead dismissed. So we’ll have to see.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

There is no letter of the law in the eu. The DMA made it so convoluted this is the mess that ensured. You didn’t think Apple was going to give up without a fight?

As far as the US one never knows. Remember the FaceTime bug lawsuit. Most Apple critics thought Apple would go down and instead dismissed. So we’ll have to see.

The DMA isn’t convoluted. It dictates what you can’t do. What results you can’t result in. How you do that is fully dependent on you.

How the U.S. and EU law works is so distinct it’s Wilde when U.S. lawyers tried to apply U.S. legal philosophy in EU law

Every instance Apple have implemented their ”solution” they are prima facie illegal and non compliant.

The FaceTime lawsuit was a nonstarter here. I’m surprised it wasn’t just thrown out of court 1 second after it was filed in the U.S.

 

[I7guy]

The DMA isn’t convoluted. It dictates what you can’t do. What results you can’t result in. How you do that is fully dependent on you.

How the U.S. and EU law works is so distinct it’s Wilde when U.S. lawyers tried to apply U.S. legal philosophy in EU law

Every instance Apple have implemented their ”solution” they are prima facie illegal and non compliant.

The FaceTime lawsuit was a nonstarter here. I’m surprised it wasn’t just thrown out of court 1 second after it was filed in the U.S.

The DMA is a mess. The eu studied apples business model for some time before codified a set of regulations attempting to make apple into a public utility. Apple is fighting back attempting to prevent that from happening.

 

[Stuwil]

But epic largely lost and the case is in appeal.

It’s unfortunate eu is playing in bad faith. As I said Apple, google and meta should leave the eu. They’ll have to regulate Spotify because that’s what’s left.

You don’t really care that the EU is regulating google and meta or any other tech company your complaint is the EU are regulating apple and it’s about time some get regulated

 

[Stuwil]

The DMA is a mess. The eu studied apples business model for some time before codified a set of regulations attempting to make apple into a public utility. Apple is fighting back attempting to prevent that from happening.

You keep saying the EU are attempting to turn apple into a public utility so what do you mean by that?
like for example if you’re over a certain age demographic then that’s why you think like that

 

[I7guy]

You keep saying the EU are attempting to turn apple into a public utility so what do you mean by that?
like for example if you’re over a certain age demographic then that’s why you think like that

I can't explain my opinion any more clearly.

 

[I7guy]

You don’t really care that the EU is regulating google and meta or any other tech company your complaint is the EU are regulating apple and it’s about time some get regulated

It's not relevant to the conversation. If you want to chime in with your opinions, please feel free to do so.

 

[Stuwil]

It's not relevant to the conversation. If you want to chime in with your opinions, please feel free to do so.

It is relevant because you use language like it’s not over till it’s over regarding court cases and legislation involving apple.
Yet you are including other tech companies like google into your dislike for the EU to hide the fact that it’s because Apple are getting regulated and mandated that’s all because if it was android you couldn’t give a stuff.

 

[Stuwil]

I can't explain my opinion any more clearly.

The reason why you keep using language like the EU is treating apple like a public utility is because you are old and not from younger people’s generation regarding today’s society
And if someone uses the language like it’s not over till it’s over will obviously be against anything remotely affecting apple

 

[I7guy]

It is relevant because you use language like it’s not over till it’s over regarding court cases and legislation involving apple.
Yet you are including other tech companies like google into your dislike for the EU to hide the fact that it’s because Apple are getting regulated and mandated that’s all because if it was android you couldn’t give a stuff.

The DMA is a mess and government overreach. At some level apple, google and meta should leave the EU and let them regulate spotify to death. but the DMA most targets apple. So no, it's not relevant.

 

[Stuwil]

The DMA is a mess and government overreach. At some level apple, google and meta should leave the EU and let them regulate spotify to death. but the DMA most targets apple. So no, it's not relevant.

You think the DMA is a mess because you use language like we are under attack and it’s not over till it’s over regarding apple because you are not balanced in your criticism because you are one of them

 

[I7guy]

You think the DMA is a mess because you use language like we are under attack and it’s not over till it’s over regarding apple because you are not balanced in your criticism because you are one of them

And you think the DMA is perfect, because you don't like big American tech and the DMA forces apple's ip into the public domain?

 

[Stuwil]

And you think the DMA is perfect, because you don't like big American tech and the DMA forces apple's ip into the public domain?

Again I have a current iPhone buddy so I just don’t get raging when certain legislation is getting introduced

 

[I7guy]

Again I have a current iPhone buddy so I just don’t get raging when certain legislation is getting introduced

Whether on "rages" or not, or is pedantic or not this is still a place for discussion and opinions regarding apples' lot in the world as it relates to the EU. 🤷‍♂️

 

[Stuwil]

Whether on "rages" or not, or is pedantic or not this is still a place for discussion and opinions regarding apples' lot in the world as it relates to EU

Because buddy if the EU just said right google we are just looking at your business practices and only made changes to google and android then YOU wouldn’t give a stuff however because it’s against apple you are raging because your complaint regarding the EU is not coming from a balanced point of view

 

[I7guy]

Because buddy if the EU just said right google we are just looking at your business practices and only made changes to google and android then YOU wouldn’t give a stuff however because it’s against apple you are raging because your complaint regarding the EU is not coming from a balanced point of view

Your comments are clearly not coming from a balanced point of view. Isn’t that what opinions are for? They don’t need to be balanced, hence opinions.

there are those who don’t like the practices of the eu? Got it?

 

[Stuwil]

Your comments are clearly not coming from a balanced point of view. Isn’t that what opinions are for? They don’t need to be balanced, hence opinions.

there are those who don’t like the practices of the eu? Got it?

Well they are balanced because I own a current iPhone and have had various different models over the last 17 years or so
And I don’t use language like we are under attack or it’s not over till it’s over regarding apple. If I feel that certain regulations or court orders are wrong then I take a measured approach where as the default position from some is leave apple along and go to android

 

[I7guy]

Well they are balanced because I own a current iPhone and have had various different models over the last 17 years or so
And I don’t use language like we are under attack or it’s not over till it’s over regarding apple. If I feel that certain regulations or court orders are wrong then I take a measured approach where as the default position from some is leave apple along and go to android

I disagree, your comments aren’t balanced. Saying “it’s not over till it’s over” is an aphorism. Just like “don’t count your chickens until they hatch”. And yes Apple is under attack putting the government aside, it’s the MR user community of which many don’t have a balanced viewpoint.

Apple won’t win everything nor will they lose everything.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Your comments are clearly not coming from a balanced point of view. Isn’t that what opinions are for? They don’t need to be balanced, hence opinions.

there are those who don’t like the practices of the eu? Got it?

Indeed. At least the opinion should be well founded in some way. Or the issue with let’s say the rules based on the legal facts.

I respect your opinion of the DMA as you dislike it from a philosophical/moral standpoint, and we will never agree on that standpoint.

But I even think it could be written better in some ways I would prefer and be even stricter and more encompassing, but unfortunately never something we or most other critical voices here get to as it’s largely just a moral question divorced from the law.

But your pet peeves and interpretation of the regulations is largely unfounded and poorly conceived, but understandable if you’re strictly coming from us is legal theory and common law

 

[I7guy]

Indeed. At least the opinion should be well founded in some way.

Indeed. There are plenty of outrageous opinions, but they are still opinions.

Or the issue with let’s say the rules based on the legal facts.

I respect your opinion of the DMA as you dislike it from a philosophical/moral standpoint , I even think it could be written better in some ways I would prefer and be even stricter and more encompassing.

But your pet peeves and interpretation of the regulations is largely unfounded and poorly conceived, but understandable if you’re strictly coming from us is legal theory and common law

What the DMA is the eu is playing robin hood with apples assets. A ideological philosophy rooted in one of the -isms of the past.

Now this particular ruling was narrow in the Netherlands. Nevertheless.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Indeed. There are plenty of outrageous opinions, but they are still opinions.

Indeed but hopefully more based on substance and not vibes.

What the DMA is the eu is playing robin hood with apples assets. A ideological philosophy rooted in one of the -isms of the past.

Now this particular ruling was narrow in the Netherlands. Nevertheless.

Well I would still say it’s fully ancored in existing anti competitive cases that have been conducted over the last 20-30 years.

As well as the competition law EU have had for half a century( before its 2009 reform)
Let’s be precise here: the EU didn’t write the DMA by dissecting Apple’s business model and deciding to punish it. That’s a mischaracterization. The DMA isn’t about one company, it’s about recurring patterns of behavior observed across many dominant platforms over many years, through formal competition law cases.

Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Facebook all were investigated under Article 101 and 102 TFEU for:

• self-preferencing,
• refusal to interoperate,
• tying and bundling,
• anti-steering,
• and leveraging market dominance into adjacent services.

These weren’t ideological opinions they were legal decisions, backed by enforcement processes, evidence, and often court rulings. And they revealed a pattern: once digital firms gain entrenched market power, certain types of abuse keep recurring.

So the EU didn’t “study Apple” it studied its own case law. The DMA is the result of that:


👉 It codifies proven abusive behaviors as clear-cut ex ante obligations.

👉 It applies those rules only to platforms that meet the threshold of systemic gatekeeping power.

👉 It creates a regulatory shortcut to avoid wasting years on repeat legal battles over the same conduct.

That’s not ideology. That’s what a civil law system does when precedent isn’t binding: it legislates based on the accumulated legal logic of past enforcement.

And in a civil law system, unlike in the U.S., precedent isn’t law. So if you want to build consistent, enforceable obligations, you need legislation, not just court rulings. That’s why the DMA was necessary because past rulings didn’t bind future conduct.

 

[I7guy]

Indeed but hopefully more based on substance and not vibes.

Opinions are opinions.

Well I would still say it’s fully ancored in existing anti competitive cases that have been conducted over the last 20-30 years.

As well as the competition law EU have had for half a century( before its 2009 reform)
Let’s be precise here: the EU didn’t write the DMA by dissecting Apple’s business model and deciding to punish it.

I don’t believe that’s true. There are two many characteristics of the DMA that say otherwise. Let’s start with revenue and not market share.

That’s a mischaracterization. The DMA isn’t about one company, it’s about recurring patterns of behavior observed across many dominant platforms over many years, through formal competition law cases.

Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Facebook all were investigated under Article 101 and 102 TFEU for:

• self-preferencing,
• refusal to interoperate,
• tying and bundling,
• anti-steering,
• and leveraging market dominance into adjacent services.

These weren’t ideological opinions they were legal decisions, backed by enforcement processes, evidence, and often court rulings. And they revealed a pattern: once digital firms gain entrenched market power, certain types of abuse keep recurring.

So the EU didn’t “study Apple” it studied its own case law. The DMA is the result of that:


👉 It codifies proven abusive behaviors as clear-cut ex ante obligations.

👉 It applies those rules only to platforms that meet the threshold of systemic gatekeeping power.

👉 It creates a regulatory shortcut to avoid wasting years on repeat legal battles over the same conduct.

That’s not ideology. That’s what a civil law system does when precedent isn’t binding: it legislates based on the accumulated legal logic of past enforcement.

And in a civil law system, unlike in the U.S., precedent isn’t law. So if you want to build consistent, enforceable obligations, you need legislation, not just court rulings. That’s why the DMA was necessary because past rulings didn’t bind future conduct.

The DMA is terrible legislation and one reason the Wall Street journal has declared the eu a technological desert. As my signature tagline- “regulate not innovate” reads that is where the eu is today.