Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Epic Games Says Court 'Reached the Wrong Answer' and Made 'Multiple Legal Errors' in Apple Fight
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Statement by Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager on the Statement of Objections sent to Apple on App Store rules for music streaming providers
Today, the Commission has sent a Statement of Objections to Apple. Our preliminary conclusion is that Apple abused its dominant position for the distribution of music streaming apps through its App St
Corporate internal transfers are still transfers to themselves. The total sum on apples bank account is still 100% of the sale
That’s not proof, it’s supposition. Doesn’t cite any sources that would lend credence to the fact there is no internal transfers.Statement by Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager on the Statement of Objections sent to Apple on App Store rules for music streaming providers
Today, the Commission has sent a Statement of Objections to Apple. Our preliminary conclusion is that Apple abused its dominant position for the distribution of music streaming apps through its App Stec.europa.eu
Spotify and Apple music are both operating on iOS. Spotify pays 30% cut to Apple whereas Apple does not. This disadvantages Spotify. This is the only relevant factor here. The rest is irrelevant.
Whether or not apple does an internal transfer for the commission is up for debate. That Apple DOESNT is an internet meme as nobody has been able to show irrefutable proof one way or another.
Really? Apple making Apple pay 30% cut to Apple on every transaction that Apple makes is not the same as Spotify paying 30% cut to Apple.
Internal transfers aren’t a transaction. This is what you do when you move money from your bank account to another of your bank account, ending up with no change.
The source is themselves as the investigator
And Whether or not apple does an internal transfer for the commission is not even relevant, as the result is the same.
the fact you pay yourself for cleaning the house doesn't change the fact 0 value changed hands.
No it’s not the same. Many corporations have inter-departmental transfers. Even though the net result is take from Peter to pay Paul. This can’t be proved either way.
they arent, ther's zero evidenve or reasons to belive teh costs of having applemusic in teh appstore is equal to the costs spotify would pay for a user signing up.
Not according to the EU and the EU's preliminary findings aren't good for Apple. Oops..
Apple tax unfair to other streaming services, EU says in Spotify-triggered lawsuit
The EU's preliminary findings aren't good for Apple...
Wouldn’t expect a government with an agenda to make an unfounded claim otherwise.Not according to the EU and the EU's preliminary findings aren't good for Apple. Oops..
Apple tax unfair to other streaming services, EU says in Spotify-triggered lawsuit
The EU's preliminary findings aren't good for Apple...www.whathifi.com
I understand, know one really knows. The EU will change the laws and make the case regardless.
What matters is that the laws will be changed till they are applicable, if needed. The intent is clear. They know Apple (and others, especially GAFAM) are anti-competitive and they will not stop until their behavior changes. Apples legal shenanigans like they are doing in the Netherlands regarding dating apps will not work as these are ex-ante regulations and are aimed at precisely the need to regulate the anticompetitive behavior of these companies. The writing is on the wall. Apple can get ahead of it and lead others or get dragged kicking and screaming. Their choice.
It’s also a choice to leave the EU of the net cost to apple large due to loss of revenue, brand image and brand value. I’m sure apple will make the right choice.
The EU market accounts for 30% of Apple's annual revenue. They arent going anywhere.
Interesting in a sense that, Epic may have lost the case, but governments everywhere are starting to hound Apple for its anti-competitive practices and are drafting laws to force side-loading.
Which is exactly what Epic wanted.
Which is exactly what Epic wanted.
Did he really lose, though? Did you read the EU's Digital Market Act legislation? It may have well been written by Tim Sweeney himself.
CURRENTLY, under the current laws. If, with the new laws Apple performs their internal analysis and finds their annual revenue from the EU market is 5%, the value of staying in the EU becomes clear. I’m sure it will be put to a vote by the shareholders and they will indicate that the dollars would best be spent and have the better return in friendlier markets.
By that point, Apple will just have to respond to the demands of the shareholders.
It’s a LONG way from being settled legislation. I’m more curious to see what exemptions and exceptions end up in what they finally attempt to pass.
"The Committee of the Permanent Representatives of the Governments of the Member States to the European Union approved and published the final text of the provisional agreement for the Digital Markets Act. The COREPER's approval came with no further changes compared to the last amended version of the DMA text from April 18."
Cause we haven't seen a government with an agenda in mind make up reports...Not according to the EU and the EU's preliminary findings aren't good for Apple. Oops..
Apple tax unfair to other streaming services, EU says in Spotify-triggered lawsuit
The EU's preliminary findings aren't good for Apple...
All governments have agendas... in this case the EU is trying to overreach into something they know little off. When the privacy snafus that Apple warns come to happen, we will see the EU question Apple.