There's no way Apple are rolling these changes outwithout knowing it meets DMA requirements.
It would be too hard to release it and then undo it later - you cant force people to install another iOS upgrade.
Just takes one person to hold onto it ...
Apple's lawyers will have checked every word and that the changes meet those words.
EU have had a while now to read what Apple is proposing and they havent come out and said no to it.
Spotify and Epic are knwon whingers leveraging their market share and profile to pretend to be interested in consumers. They arent.
Eu have said they won’t comment until after the deadline. So no apple isn’t in the clear.
EU Supreme Court have a tendency to interpret laws through comparative analysis and Theological analysis of the text.
Contextual Interpretation
Contextual interpretation asks us to look beyond the words of a text and to examine the context in which the law exists. This interpretation has two possible perspectives:
A. Systemic interpretation
The ECJ can look inward and consider the EU law provision in question as being a cog in the system, and ask which interpretation makes the most sense based on how this law should function as part of the overarching system. This method of interpretation assumes that the legislator is rational and emphasises the effect a law will have when it is put into practise. The aim of this is to bring more consistency to EU law and to avoid an interpretation which clashes with the broader system.
B. Travaux Préparatoires (preparatory work)
Alternatively, the ECJ can consider what the legislators (the Commission, the Parliament, and the Council) intended by looking at what they said during negotiation. This can be accessed from preparatory documents produced during the various stages of the legislative and budgetary process. It is important to note that the interpretation of EU law can only be based on documents which are accessible to the public.
Teleological interpretation
Teleological interpretation has been very important for EU law. It looks at the objective of the law, considering the purpose, values, legal social and economic goals it aims to achieve. It is regarded as the method of interpretation relied on most heavily by the ECJ, who relied on it to establish that EU law had to be in line with human rights standards
The ECJ harmonizes the generality of EU primary law with the technicality of EU secondary law by considering the aims and objectives of EU treaties. Due to its focus on the effect and purpose of a law, teleological interpretation and systemic interpretation are often interlinked.
The beauty of this method is that it allows the judge to take technological and social advancements into account, so older laws are interpreted in law with changing social norms. For example, the meaning of marriage and family can be expanded to include LGBTQIA+ families, whereas it originally only referred to a union between a man and a woman.
The right to privacy of correspondence originally only applied to letters, however in line with advancements in technology, this was then interpreted to include phone and later email. Similarly, as most of our personal information is shared digitally, the right to privacy was expanded to what we now call data protection.
Textualism (Literal Interpretation)
Also known as literal interpretation, textualism holds that the meaning of a text is contained within its words. If it is clear from reading a sentence what a reasonable person would understand is being communicated to them, then we should accept this “plain meaning” without needing to rely on more convoluted methods of interpretation.
