EU Planning to Force Apple to Give Developers Access to All Hardware and Software Features

[No5tromo]

Because the whole point is “APPLE HAS SOMETHING SPECIAL, SO SPECIAL THAT WE’LL CALL IT A MONOPOLY, THAT WE WANT AND WE’LL DO ANYTHING INCLUDING VASTLY CHANGING RULES ON COMMERCE IN ORDER TO GET OUR HANDS ON IT!”

For a company that doesn’t have any exclusivity over anything, there sure appears to be a lot of focus in the EU on the generic same/same things they produce.

I don't see it like that. Apple has a big share in the tech market and with that comes a lot of power, this power need to be regulated, you can't have a tech giant making its own rules. Not saying that whatever the EU proposes is automatically the right thing but it surprises me that some people dismiss this conversation altogether.

 

[planteater]

Nothing I said was a lie. The EU wants to force Apple to operate in a way that infringes upon the security-centric and privacy-conscious design of their product. The EU is basically saying, "make your product less secure, even though we don't know jack about security; or leave."

Apple is completely in the right to call out the ignorance and poor foresight of the EU's proposal, and suggest that the EU's effectively forcing Apple to choose between weakening the security and privacy protections it provides its customers or leaving the market altogether. The EU is not the good guy here, and Apple has every right to defend itself against stupidity and malice.

If anything, Apple has a responsibility and moral duty to inform the EU's citizens that their government is inept and trying to weaken their own security and privacy protections.

I disagree with one point. The EU is not being inept, they are acting precisely for a purpose. As you stated, to break privacy and security. They want their spying institutions to have full access to all consumer data. Period. That is why they are doing it, and why other governments will follow.

 

[lartola]

Yep, I’m sure that pulling out of a relatively affluent market of almost half a billion potential customers is right at the top of Tim Cook’s to-do list. Just right after he closes down the much smaller US market. ?

They’ll probably just pay the fine if the EU sets one. If not, and the only choices are to either comply or pull out, I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple prefers to pull out, despite the size of the market. It is extremely hard to make apple bend.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Yes, that's the point—you can't put an app on the App Store if it's using Apple's internal/private APIs (you might get away with it, but probably not). That's exactly what I was saying. Not to mention the fact that internal APIs aren't obvious to devs anyway, so not a lot of people even know about them.

Hmm, okay... I can't find this in that doc, but thanks for pointing it out... I guess it's a good thing I'm not a lawyer. ?

I suppose there is a degree to which companies with so much power and reach should be expected to function more as public institutions than private companies. They have too much direct impact on too many lives to be given the arbitrary freedoms that corporations are afforded. But ultimately I'm pretty skeptical that this is going to matter all that much. Clearly the way things are currently functioning is broken, and something has to be done. I'm just not sure this is the fix...

Perhaps, but with this a gatekeeper will have legal obligations they must follow. Unlike the USA. There is no constitution that can invalidate a law by precedent. And new laws always supersede old legislation

 

[SBlue1]

If this passes, Apple should just send an email and notification to every customer in the EU saying something to the effect of, “due to your government’s heavy-handed overreach, they will be blocking Apple from providing safe and secure services, like our App Store. As a result, we can no longer legally offer these services in the EU and will cease operations within 30 days.”

Just the threat of millions of devices losing iMessage, FaceTime, and the App Store framed properly will get the public on their side. I guarantee it’d turn this whole thing around within 48 hours.

iMessage and Facetime??? They are irrelevant in Europe because you can't use them with non Apple devices or with your Android or Windows friends. Nobody will care if Apple pulls those.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

So you're saying that if Apple threatened to pull out, those half a billion potential customers would be mad at Apple? Or would they direct their frustration towards the imbecile lawmakers swinging way beyond their expertise trying to get everyone open access to one particular company's hardware and software?

As another poster said, the threat is all it would take - this would be over in 48 hours

How much power do you think a minority of a 20~% user base have on political in union with parliamentary democratic institutions?
We have hundreds of parties in power. It’s 100% impossible to primary someone as it’s not a thing as another party can just take their place.

There is no democrat vs Republican ********. Coalition governments are the name of the game

 

[SBlue1]

This is what gets me. Apple should just keep doing what they're doing, and ignore the fines and these made-up "rules" they want to pass.

What's the EU going to do? Send a goon squad to the US to seize assets? They have no jurisdiction over American companies or property.

Yeah now thinking about that Apple can ignore paying taxes too. I mean what's the EU gonna do?? Seize assets in the US? LOL!

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Imagine feeling this entitled to have "access to all hardware and software features" of something that you didn't spend decades building, that has hundreds of millions of users that like it just the way it is. Should I just not buy things that don't serve my needs? Or should I demand access to "all hardware and software features" of every automaker? Every smart fridge manufacturer and television maker?

I CAN'T INSTALL INCOMPATIBLE PARTS FROM ANOTHER MANUFACTURER INTO MY CAR, AND I CAN'T RUN THIS CRAPPY SOFTWARE THAT I WROTE ON MY VEHICLE, I NEED A LAW THAT GRANTS ME ACCESS TO ALL HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE FEATURES

Well why not just not buy that car, or build your own car if you want that degree of customization?

NO, IT HAS TO BE THIS CAR I ALREADY CHOSE TO BUY KNOWING FULL WELL WHAT IT WAS AND WASN'T CAPABLE OF AT THE TIME

Well… you can install parts and run software on your fridge or car. It’s your property you can do with as you wish?

 

[mikethemartian]

We have OBD. Allows Joe Public to do a huge amount of, (whilst not all), diagnostics with a relatively cheap scanner.
Schematics aren't that hard to get hold of. Vehicles use a lot of regularly available consumables too.
They also sell special tools to garages and individuals alike.
Plenty of reputable businesses that will flash your ECU.

Not sure your comparison is as valid as you think.

I never understand the argument that many make that modern vehicles are too complex for individuals to work on themselves.

 

[davidjschloss]

Only took 7 minutes for a ridiculous comment

Only took 8 minutes to show that forum readers don't understand sarcasm.

 

[davidjschloss]

I assume you also don’t install anything on your laptop either?

Please cite all the Mac apps known to do the listed spying/data collection.

 

[@Brett]

I assume the EU has not consulted with users of these devices. If the EU thinks it’s so great let it be transparent and see how much money companies are paying you to force someone to open up their IP.

 

[NapoleonIV]

This is really good. It will produce more innovation and competition which will be good for consumers and developers alike.

 

[I7guy]

Well… you can install parts and run software on your fridge or car. It’s your property you can do with as you wish?

Sure, but the manufacturer doesn’t have to help you. And while you can do what you want to your unauthorized modifications can lead to warranty loss.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I disagree with one point. The EU is not being inept, they are acting precisely for a purpose. As you stated, to break privacy and security. They want their spying institutions to have full access to all consumer data. Period. That is why they are doing it, and why other governments will follow.

I’m sorry but do we have any evidence about breaking privacy and security?
Considering one of the explicit things companies can’t do is:

track end users outside of the gatekeepers' core platform service for the purpose of targeted advertising, without effective consent having been granted

This covers Facebook and google etc

The Digital Services Act also stipulates that the end user must be offered at least one recommender algorithm option that is “not based on profiling,” or any of the sort of information usually collected for targeted advertising. One simple model is the “chronological feed” which lists all posts from those on a user’s following list in the order they were posted, rather than engaging a recommender algorithm as a filter.

Targeted advertising is being banned entirely from using certain categories of sensitive personal information: a recent press release names sexual orientation, religion and ethnicity as specific examples. It is also banned from targeting minors. The bill also promises all users “better control” over how personal data is used.

The “dark patterns” that also often govern the opt-out process of information sharing are also being banned entirely. And users must now be able to just as easily opt out of services that make use of targeted advertising as they opted in

Notices of collection of personal information for targeted advertising must also be non-arbitrary and non-discriminatory and respect fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and data protection.

algorithmic accountability.
The European Commission is requiring that gatekeeper platforms provide both it and EU member states access to the inner workings of recommender algorithms for scrutiny, and the public will be offered more information about them as well

 

[M3gatron]

Imagine feeling this entitled to have "access to all hardware and software features" of something that you didn't spend decades building, that has hundreds of millions of users that like it just the way it is. Should I just not buy things that don't serve my needs? Or should I demand access to "all hardware and software features" of every automaker? Every smart fridge manufacturer and television maker?

I don't see any problem, the access to all hardware and software features in the end is in the benefit of the owners of the devices.

I CAN'T INSTALL INCOMPATIBLE PARTS FROM ANOTHER MANUFACTURER INTO MY CAR, AND I CAN'T RUN THIS CRAPPY SOFTWARE THAT I WROTE ON MY VEHICLE, I NEED A LAW THAT GRANTS ME ACCESS TO ALL HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE FEATURES
Well why not just not buy that car, or build your own car if you want that degree of customization?

NO, IT HAS TO BE THIS CAR I ALREADY CHOSE TO BUY KNOWING FULL WELL WHAT IT WAS AND WASN'T CAPABLE OF AT THE TIME

Irrelevant. You also can't install parts into iphones form other smartphones. And granting access to hardware and software features is not the same thing not to mention, cars are different products entirely and are regulated differently in comparison to gadgets.

 

[hagar]

If this passes, Apple should just send an email and notification to every customer in the EU saying something to the effect of, “due to your government’s heavy-handed overreach, they will be blocking Apple from providing safe and secure services, like our App Store. As a result, we can no longer legally offer these services in the EU and will cease operations within 30 days.”

Just the threat of millions of devices losing iMessage, FaceTime, and the App Store framed properly will get the public on their side. I guarantee it’d turn this whole thing around within 48 hours.

Let’s make you CEO and watch Apple go bankrupt in 30 days.

Also, Europeans couldn’t care less about iMessage and to a least extent FaceTime. They’re not a thing over here (unfortunately).

 

[MNGR]

The people against this forget it is optional... simply a win-win for the consumer and especially tech nerds who can do with their device what they like!

It’s not optional. Requires a change to the HW and software security infrastructure.
And when things break, who is responsible?

 

[Danfango]

Britain left because they are stupid.

As someone from the UK, I both simultaneously agree and disagree with this.

I agree because that's why we left.

I disagree because quite frankly the EU regulatory environment is painful to run a business under even if it's an ethical one that doesn't screw everyone over.

I also agree because when we left it allowed our political elite to come up with even stupider ideas. Fortunately they aren't as competent as the EU so probably won't be able to pull them off or will backpedal like a hipster on a fixie trying not to end up under some truck tyres.

 

[jakey rolling]

Sure, but the manufacturer doesn’t have to help you. And while you can do what you want to your unauthorized modifications can lead to warranty loss.

What point are you even trying to make here? Warranties have never covered third-party hardware modifications or software problems - whether it be on phones or computers or literally anything else in the world.

 

[jakey rolling]

And when things break, who is responsible?

The person who broke them. As has always been the case.

 

[Luap]

Can't each countries own government decide for itself? Why does the (unelected) EU have to decide for all?

 

[jakey rolling]

granting access to hardware and software features is not the same thing

It's not even in the ballpark of the same thing. The entire purpose of a general purpose operating system is to provide an interface to hardware and to provide APIs and services to support software applications. "Granting access to hardware and software" is what general purpose operating systems are supposed to do.

 

[BaldiMac]

What point are you even trying to make here? Warranties have never covered third-party hardware modifications or software problems - whether it be on phones or computers or literally anything else in the world.

The point is that these regulations aren’t simply allowing people to modify the hardware they purchased. They’re forcing Apple to create new code to support third parties without compensation.

 

[BaldiMac]

It's not even in the ballpark of the same thing. The entire purpose of a general purpose operating system is to provide an interface to hardware and to provide APIs and services to support software applications. "Granting access to hardware and software" is what general purpose operating systems are supposed to do.

Apple never claimed to be making a “general purpose operating system”. That’s just a term that you applied to them to justify forcing them to to do what you’d like.