12 ms·

Apple warns of risks from German law to open up mobile payments

83 points by kayoone 7y ago

mscasts 7y ago
Thank you, Germany. I love the EU and it's countries more and more for every news article like this.
- Angostura 7y ago
  What do you like about this regulation? What do you see being implemented in practice and how will it change the customer experience? I seriously don't see the advantage.
  - izacus 7y ago
    I like the fact that my local EU bank will actually be allowed to offer me mobile payments as opposed to now, when Apple refuses to even talk to them because my country is too small.
    - systemtest 7y ago
      Do you have a source for the claim you make here?
      - unionpivo 7y ago
        https://support.apple.com/sl-si/HT206637#Europe https://support.apple.com/sl-si/HT206637#Europe Slovenia - Missing all of the biggest ones. None of the ones I use-used are on the list: Nova Ljubljanska Banka - the biggest one SKB banka Abanka Sparkasse And I have never heard of any on the list.
        Angostura 7y ago
        Do have a source for the fact that the reason they aren't on the list is that "Apple refuses to even talk to them because my country is too small." I mean in the UK, Tesco, the largest food retailer won't take Apple Pay because it doesn't give them enough data. Instead, if you want to pay with your phone over £30 you have to download their own damned app.
    - briandear 7y ago
      Your country must be microscopic because even Malta, Liechtenstein and Luxembourg have supported banks. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT206637#Europe https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT206637#Europe Perhaps you live here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand
      - Krasnol 7y ago
        It's not really surprising that the EUs tax haven countries support whatever there is to support around money ;)
  - krzyk 7y ago
    You don't see advantage to have an option to use e.g. Google Pay on iPhone? Apple Pay adoption in banks (in EU at least) is much worse than Google Pay, so if I have account in bank that has only Google Pay I can't currently use iPhone to do payments.
    - Ensorceled 7y ago
      That's what we are asking, what does this law do for us (well, for Germans). Just blindly saying "Thanks" isn't useful to the discussion. It sounds like it forces Apple to open up the NFC stack to other applications?
  - zihotki 7y ago
    In order to implement Apple Pay in a country, a bank needs to beg Apple. And it looks like Apple doesn't care about smaller banks and small countries at all. For example, in NL they allowed only a few biggest banks to implement Apple Pay.
    - Angostura 7y ago
      > they allowed only a few biggest banks to implement Apple Pay. Again, is there a statement from any of these smaller banks saying 'we'd love to have it but Apple won't let us'?
    - systemtest 7y ago
      The Netherlands has Apple Pay on ABN, ING, Bunq, N26 and Rabobank. That should cover around 80% of the market.
    - briandear 7y ago
      Apple wants every bank. The discrimination comes from the payment processors — it’s likely that those payment processors who handle transactions for the local banks don’t care about the smaller banks. For example, FirstData in the US drove and facilitated adoption — it wasn’t the banks that reached out to Apple or vice versa. It’s fun to say something like “a bank needs to beg Apple,” but that is just not based in any sort of fact. Instead your comment attempts to paint a picture that big, bad Apple is mean to little banks when the truth is far more complex and has little to do with Apple and everything to do with payment processors. It’s also very likely your small bank doesn’t want to pay the 15 basis points on credit or the 3 basis points for debit. But saying Apple doesn’t care about smaller banks — that’s just a lie. Some of the smallest banks all across the US are using Apple Pay. It’s possible and probable that your bank just does want to offer Apple Pay. Here is an interesting article from 2015 about banks and Apple Pay: https://www.bankdirector.com/issues/technology/becoming-an-apple-pay-bank-should-you-do-it/ https://www.bankdirector.com/issues/technology/becoming-an-a... Please note the lack of “begging” involved in the process discussed in the article linked above.
izacus 7y ago
Of course the monopolist is warning against having to allow competition to their market. Nothing to see there. If Apple Pay is so much better than what the banks offer (which it probably is), then there's no issue, people will continue demanding and using it. It will force Apple to improve their product over what the banks can do constantly and that's how we customers win.
- simonh 7y ago
  One of the ways it's better is by being extremely secure, and anonymising customer data to ensure privacy. Their argument is that forcing them to allow other companies to implement parts of the system could compromise those advantages for consumers. I don't know if they're right, but then I don't know exactly what this law requires them to do, or what the implications of that would be.
  - izacus 7y ago
    The law demands that they allow non-Apple apps to use NFC to process payments. > Their argument is that forcing them to allow other companies to implement parts of the system could compromise those advantages for consumers. Why would that ever be the case? The demand is for Apple to extend that secure payment processing to other companies on their locked down platform, not to compromise their payment product.
  - amluto 7y ago
    > One of the ways it's better is by being extremely secure, and anonymising customer data to ensure privacy. Can you clarify? As far as I can tell, Apple Pay looks more or less like a regular credit card, and it even has a credit card number that apparently never changes. Plenty of merchant apps will recognize Apple Pay users because they once used it at a different merchant. Security? The day Apple Pay prompts, on the phone, “authorize $X to merchant Y?” I’ll grant them a meaningful security improvements. Other than that, it’s just a contactless card with biometric authentication.
    - briandear 7y ago
simonh 7y ago
I'm not against a law like this in principle, at least I don't have an instinctive aversion, but it seems a mistake to ram it through without any consultation or a proper review by technical and financial experts. And by that I don't just mean industry insiders, but security researchers, etc.
- martin_a 7y ago
  > without any consultation or a proper review by technical and financial experts Nah, that would just have opened the door for more lobbyism. Apple seems to have strongly worked against this law, seems like even the US ambassador was involved [0, about half way on the first page]. Looks like somebody hit a very sweet spot and an easy cash cow for Apple. We need more open markets for processes like this. It's just fine that Apple has to open up. [0]: https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Lex-Apple-Pay-Bundestag-bestimmt-offene-Schnittstellen-fuer-Bezahldienste-4586773.html https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Lex-Apple-Pay-Bundes...
  - simonh 7y ago
    So you can guarantee there are no security or privacy compromises in doing this?
    - wsy 7y ago
      What Apple is forced to allow now is already practice with Android phones. So we are really not talking about something new and risky, this is well-established technology.
      - Ensorceled 7y ago
        We don't know how NFC is implemented on iOS. It could be tightly bound with the iOS Secure Enclave and then it's NOT "well-established technology" since Android uses different architecture(s).
        7y ago
PeterStuer 7y ago
Having sat in on some PSD2 fintech 'opportunity' presentations, I'm without doubt that, while well intentioned, the brave new world of 'open banking' regulation will be hell for consumers and a windfall for the least scrupulous in the fintech sector.
harperlee 7y ago
Due to an anti-money laundering law? This sounds exactly like PSD2...
Ensorceled 7y ago
I'm not sure I understand this law. My Apple Pay already hooks up to my finance company's Mastercard and my bank's Visa. Who is getting access to compete for service under this law? The banks? Some other payment processors? Would it just be somebody else hooking up my credit card instead of Apple?
- krzyk 7y ago
  Apple takes quite a huge amount from each payment (~10% I heard) so if you could hook up the same credit card using e.g. Google Pay, the bank would pay only e.g. 5% (I made that number up) per transaction. Consumers don't see it, so this competition on iOS would benefit mostly banks if you think only about costs, but there is another side to this. If my bank doesn't support Apple Pay, but supports Google Pay, then I can't use my iPhone to do payments because Apple prohibits Google Pay to access NFC.
  - narrowtux 7y ago
    > 10% per payment that'd be ludicrous. I found a source that says 0.15% which is way more reasonable: https://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/12/more-apple-pay-details/ https://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/12/more-apple-pay-details/
    - Ensorceled 7y ago
      I'm amazed when people assert stuff that is ludicrous on the face of it. Places that have signs that say "no Amex" because it's 1% more fees are also implementing Apple Pay ...
    - systemtest 7y ago
      This is very reasonable, given that the bank only needs to maintain an integration with Apple Pay and that they don't have to support and maintain an app and all kinds of devices. Apple does that for them.
  - Ensorceled 7y ago
    That's not true, Apple Pay is competitive with other payment systems. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT204274 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT204274 Small business would absolutely not be implementing this if the take was 10%
aedron 7y ago
The EU has been making some good moves in opening up the payment services industry through regulation. The biggest example is the PSD2 regulations passed in 2015[1]. Among many other things, this law requires banks in the EU to expose APIs into their systems, that allow third parties to make transfers to and from the bank's accounts, only subject to proper customer authentication and AML compliance. This essentially lets third parties build universal payment services on top of existing banking infrastructure. > The law highlights the growing desire in Germany for tighter regulation of U.S. technology companies. No, this highlights that the EU is willing and able to regulate markets to keep them open to all participants. Looking forward to laws opening up this sector even more. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_Services_Directive#Revised_Directive_on_Payment_Services_(PSD2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_Services_Directive#Rev...
- DavideNL 7y ago
  I agree, this is a great development. Hope to see the same in other EU countries.
- cprecioso 7y ago
  PSD2 is great, but as far as I remember, it doesn't make banks have a common basic API, every bank can implement it wildly differently. Next step is something like OpenBanking in the UK which does ask for common APIs.
  - grenoire 7y ago
    The next step is unfortunately not coming up anytime soon. They made account information and payment initiation service provider (AISP and PISP respectively) licensing mandatory to connect with banks, but most banks don't even have their APIs production-ready in time! Rabobank (Dutch) quoted to us the end of 2020 for their 'official' connection platform, but the requirements have been made legally binding in September...
- giancarlostoro 7y ago
  I was thinking about how much I would love it here in the US if I could have a one stop banking app for all my balances that isnt selling them to Facebook or something sketchy. I think open APIs would be the only way I would trust it. If I had the app source it would work for me. Even if I only have it for bigger banks I just want less apps and more uniformity.
jeroenhd 7y ago
Apple could've probably easily prevented this if they had allowed banking payment apps from the beginning, like Google did. Without an exclusive payment system, they would just be a payment alternative that would be way more user friendly than their competitors and everything would be dandy. I'd even consider it to be a reason to buy an iPhone, given their super simple UX flow compared to even the most user friendly bank apps. I hope not just Germany, but also the EU will take action against companies like Apple. These exclusive networks that serve no purpose other than vendor lock-in are a lose-lose scenario for customers and even the most rabid Apple fans should see how shitty their behaviour is. They've made their bed and now they will have to lie in it. Good on Germany for taking action.
- systemtest 7y ago
  I've seen the mess that banking apps on Android made. Not supporting certain phone models despite having NFC, needing a special SIM-card for the secure element, horrible UX. Multi-bank support meant switching between apps before payment. It's better now but far from perfect. The benefit of the Apple Wallet for customers is having all your cards in one app, available from the lock screen. The benefit to the bank is that they don't have to make an app, they just need the back-end integration with Apple Pay.
  - jeroenhd 7y ago
    Of course some banks are shit. In some countries you can't log in to your bank without ActiveX. Most banks I've seen (in Europe, at least) are quite with the times and support basically any device with NFC. For Apple this is especially easy because there's only 6 models of phone to support with a single API. There's no way a bank app would drop support on a maintained iOS device. In my country, every bank has supported contactless payments for at least 3-4 years. My bank has a pretty nice UX, as do many of its competitors. Some other apps are more focused on security than user experience, which manifests itself in an irritating slow mess, but that's just another factor to take into account when picking a bank. A few months ago, the first bank in my country announced Apple pay support. Up till then, Apple customers have been behind the curve on simple features that even the cheapest Chinese phone had. Now that banks started supporting Apple Pay, every single customer, including me, is paying Apple for the extra fees that banks need to pay to Apple for integration (because they're not allowed to charge Apple customers directly). I don't have any Apple decides whatsoever and so do most households I know of, yet we're all funding Apple's little money making scheme. The benefit of Apple wallet is the same as the benefit for Google Pay and people still use that despite bank apps existing on Android. If Apple Pay is better, customers wouldn't install separate bank apps and banks still wouldn't have to make apps. The result: customers have more choice, but now the responsibility for not bringing features to users lies with the bank instead of Apple. The real difference here is that Apple doesn't allow banks to compete on iOS devices because Apple wants a portion of all payments their customers make on their phones. No matter how fancy Apple's solution is, there's no excusing their anticompetitive restrictions on their app store from a consumer standpoint. The only defences I can think of are "I don't use bank apps so I don't care", "I don't trust my bank to make software but I don't care enough to switch" or "It's technically not illegal in most countries", all of which are pretty bad excuses in my opinion.
icebraining 7y ago
Does anyone know which law it is and can post an English translations? Feels like this HN thread will be too vacuous if we don't know what we're discussing.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- lorenzhs 7y ago
  http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf from page 77, § 58a. IANAL but it looks like it matches the summary from the article pretty well. There are some exceptions, like if you can prove that opening it up would weaken the security. But it's rather clearly tailored to apply to Apple Pay. Here's a lightly touched-up translation courtesy of deepl.com -- not sure if the references made it intact (and pretty sure the legalese didn't), but it's using "clause" to refer to the numbered sub-paragraph things: § 58a: Access to technical infrastructure services in connection with the provision of payment services or the conduct of electronic money business (1) An enterprise which contributes to the provision of payment services or the operation of electronic money business in Germany through technical infrastructure services (system enterprise) shall be obliged, upon request of a payment service provider within the meaning of § 1 Clause 1 sentence 1 numbers 1 to 3 or of an electronic money issuer within the meaning of § 1 Clause 2 sentence 1 numbers 1 or 2, to make these technical infrastructure services available without delay and subject to reasonable fees and reasonable conditions of access. The provision within the meaning of sentence 1 must be designed in such a way that the requesting enterprise can provide or operate its payment services or electronic money transactions without hindrance. (2) Clause 1 shall not apply if, at the time of the request, the system operator is not a company whose technical infrastructure services are used by more than 10 payment service providers within the meaning of § 1 Clause 1 Sentence 1 Nos. 1 to 3 or e-money issuers within the meaning of § 1 Clause 2 Sentence 1 Nos. 1 or 2 or which has more than 2 million registered users. (3) In exceptional cases, the system operator shall not be obligated in accordance with Clause 1 if there are objectively justified reasons for refusing to make the service available. These are particularly present if the system enterprise can prove that the security and integrity of the technical infrastructure services is specifically endangered by the provision. The rejection must be comprehensibly justified. (4) If a system enterprise culpably infringes clause 1, it shall be obliged to compensate the inquiring enterprise for the resulting damage. The ordinary legal process is given. (5) The duties and responsibilities of the cartel authorities under the Act against Restraints of Competition shall remain unaffected.
thefounder 7y ago
>> We are surprised at how suddenly this legislation was introduced, Meanwhile we, the Apple clients are surprised why it took so long to pass this legislation. I still wonder why nothing is done against the appstore/google lock-in.
thierryzoller 7y ago
Sounds like this is just the Payment Service Directive ? Someone at APPLE must have slept while on the wheel for years.
unnouinceput 7y ago
"...could hurt data protection and the security of financial information. " Hahahahahaha, best joke I heard this month.
systemtest 7y ago
What would stop Apple from disabling NFC inside the German borders? Germans use cash for most payments, so they wouldn't lose too many customers.
C1sc0cat 7y ago
A motion Passed quickly late at night that doesn't seem at all odd. Given that Angle Merkal wanted it pulled (for good reasons) sounds like this was bounced though by either the greens or maybe by conservatives with input from the German backing sector
Notz 7y ago
Hi guys
classified 7y ago
Apple's complaints were predictable. If we let them, they'll also argue that hair loss or bad weather endanger the security of financial transactions.
edualm 7y ago
I don't see anything good coming out of this law, honestly. I've read some other commenters saying that Apple doesn't want to talk to small banks, but I find that to be the complete opposite of my experience. Here in Portugal, only one bank supports Apple Pay, and it's a small one (apart from N26/Revolut, the online ones). None of the bigger banks support it. Instead, they all support a national app that uses QR codes on iOS and NFC/QR on Android for payments (but its UX is much worse, even on Android where it uses NFC, and has a load of other problems - since it's properietary it doesn't work internationally, etc.). Of course, there is no Google Pay support at all here, and I blame the fact that NFC payments are supported on their own app. There's even less incentive for them to support Google Pay at all, and that's exactly what happened. I'm afraid that Apple Pay would be dropped if Apple was forced to open up NFC for payments.
BadThink6655321 7y ago
If Apple has to open their infrastructure then there needs to be reciprocity. I want Apple Pay. I don’t want Wal-Mart pay, Starbucks pay, CurrentC, ...
kayoone 7y ago
I would not be surprised if instead of complying, Apple would just disable ApplePay for Germany altogether.

83 points by kayoone 7y ago

mscasts 7y ago

Thank you, Germany. I love the EU and it's countries more and more for every news article like this.

Angostura 7y ago
What do you like about this regulation? What do you see being implemented in practice and how will it change the customer experience? I seriously don't see the advantage.
- izacus 7y ago
  I like the fact that my local EU bank will actually be allowed to offer me mobile payments as opposed to now, when Apple refuses to even talk to them because my country is too small.
  - systemtest 7y ago
    Do you have a source for the claim you make here?
    - unionpivo 7y ago
      https://support.apple.com/sl-si/HT206637#Europe https://support.apple.com/sl-si/HT206637#Europe Slovenia - Missing all of the biggest ones. None of the ones I use-used are on the list: Nova Ljubljanska Banka - the biggest one SKB banka Abanka Sparkasse And I have never heard of any on the list.
      - Angostura 7y ago
        Do have a source for the fact that the reason they aren't on the list is that "Apple refuses to even talk to them because my country is too small." I mean in the UK, Tesco, the largest food retailer won't take Apple Pay because it doesn't give them enough data. Instead, if you want to pay with your phone over £30 you have to download their own damned app.
  - briandear 7y ago
    Your country must be microscopic because even Malta, Liechtenstein and Luxembourg have supported banks. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT206637#Europe https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT206637#Europe Perhaps you live here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand
    - Krasnol 7y ago
      It's not really surprising that the EUs tax haven countries support whatever there is to support around money ;)
- krzyk 7y ago
  You don't see advantage to have an option to use e.g. Google Pay on iPhone? Apple Pay adoption in banks (in EU at least) is much worse than Google Pay, so if I have account in bank that has only Google Pay I can't currently use iPhone to do payments.
  - Ensorceled 7y ago
    That's what we are asking, what does this law do for us (well, for Germans). Just blindly saying "Thanks" isn't useful to the discussion. It sounds like it forces Apple to open up the NFC stack to other applications?
- zihotki 7y ago
  In order to implement Apple Pay in a country, a bank needs to beg Apple. And it looks like Apple doesn't care about smaller banks and small countries at all. For example, in NL they allowed only a few biggest banks to implement Apple Pay.
  - Angostura 7y ago
    > they allowed only a few biggest banks to implement Apple Pay. Again, is there a statement from any of these smaller banks saying 'we'd love to have it but Apple won't let us'?
  - systemtest 7y ago
    The Netherlands has Apple Pay on ABN, ING, Bunq, N26 and Rabobank. That should cover around 80% of the market.
  - briandear 7y ago
    Apple wants every bank. The discrimination comes from the payment processors — it’s likely that those payment processors who handle transactions for the local banks don’t care about the smaller banks. For example, FirstData in the US drove and facilitated adoption — it wasn’t the banks that reached out to Apple or vice versa. It’s fun to say something like “a bank needs to beg Apple,” but that is just not based in any sort of fact. Instead your comment attempts to paint a picture that big, bad Apple is mean to little banks when the truth is far more complex and has little to do with Apple and everything to do with payment processors. It’s also very likely your small bank doesn’t want to pay the 15 basis points on credit or the 3 basis points for debit. But saying Apple doesn’t care about smaller banks — that’s just a lie. Some of the smallest banks all across the US are using Apple Pay. It’s possible and probable that your bank just does want to offer Apple Pay. Here is an interesting article from 2015 about banks and Apple Pay: https://www.bankdirector.com/issues/technology/becoming-an-apple-pay-bank-should-you-do-it/ https://www.bankdirector.com/issues/technology/becoming-an-a... Please note the lack of “begging” involved in the process discussed in the article linked above.

izacus 7y ago

Of course the monopolist is warning against having to allow competition to their market. Nothing to see there. If Apple Pay is so much better than what the banks offer (which it probably is), then there's no issue, people will continue demanding and using it. It will force Apple to improve their product over what the banks can do constantly and that's how we customers win.

simonh 7y ago
One of the ways it's better is by being extremely secure, and anonymising customer data to ensure privacy. Their argument is that forcing them to allow other companies to implement parts of the system could compromise those advantages for consumers. I don't know if they're right, but then I don't know exactly what this law requires them to do, or what the implications of that would be.
- izacus 7y ago
  The law demands that they allow non-Apple apps to use NFC to process payments. > Their argument is that forcing them to allow other companies to implement parts of the system could compromise those advantages for consumers. Why would that ever be the case? The demand is for Apple to extend that secure payment processing to other companies on their locked down platform, not to compromise their payment product.
- amluto 7y ago
  > One of the ways it's better is by being extremely secure, and anonymising customer data to ensure privacy. Can you clarify? As far as I can tell, Apple Pay looks more or less like a regular credit card, and it even has a credit card number that apparently never changes. Plenty of merchant apps will recognize Apple Pay users because they once used it at a different merchant. Security? The day Apple Pay prompts, on the phone, “authorize $X to merchant Y?” I’ll grant them a meaningful security improvements. Other than that, it’s just a contactless card with biometric authentication.
  - briandear 7y ago

simonh 7y ago

I'm not against a law like this in principle, at least I don't have an instinctive aversion, but it seems a mistake to ram it through without any consultation or a proper review by technical and financial experts. And by that I don't just mean industry insiders, but security researchers, etc.

martin_a 7y ago
> without any consultation or a proper review by technical and financial experts Nah, that would just have opened the door for more lobbyism. Apple seems to have strongly worked against this law, seems like even the US ambassador was involved [0, about half way on the first page]. Looks like somebody hit a very sweet spot and an easy cash cow for Apple. We need more open markets for processes like this. It's just fine that Apple has to open up. [0]: https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Lex-Apple-Pay-Bundestag-bestimmt-offene-Schnittstellen-fuer-Bezahldienste-4586773.html https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Lex-Apple-Pay-Bundes...
- simonh 7y ago
  So you can guarantee there are no security or privacy compromises in doing this?
  - wsy 7y ago
    What Apple is forced to allow now is already practice with Android phones. So we are really not talking about something new and risky, this is well-established technology.
    - Ensorceled 7y ago
      We don't know how NFC is implemented on iOS. It could be tightly bound with the iOS Secure Enclave and then it's NOT "well-established technology" since Android uses different architecture(s).
      - 7y ago

PeterStuer 7y ago

Having sat in on some PSD2 fintech 'opportunity' presentations, I'm without doubt that, while well intentioned, the brave new world of 'open banking' regulation will be hell for consumers and a windfall for the least scrupulous in the fintech sector.

harperlee 7y ago

Due to an anti-money laundering law? This sounds exactly like PSD2...

Ensorceled 7y ago

I'm not sure I understand this law. My Apple Pay already hooks up to my finance company's Mastercard and my bank's Visa. Who is getting access to compete for service under this law? The banks? Some other payment processors? Would it just be somebody else hooking up my credit card instead of Apple?

krzyk 7y ago
Apple takes quite a huge amount from each payment (~10% I heard) so if you could hook up the same credit card using e.g. Google Pay, the bank would pay only e.g. 5% (I made that number up) per transaction. Consumers don't see it, so this competition on iOS would benefit mostly banks if you think only about costs, but there is another side to this. If my bank doesn't support Apple Pay, but supports Google Pay, then I can't use my iPhone to do payments because Apple prohibits Google Pay to access NFC.
- narrowtux 7y ago
  > 10% per payment that'd be ludicrous. I found a source that says 0.15% which is way more reasonable: https://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/12/more-apple-pay-details/ https://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/12/more-apple-pay-details/
  - Ensorceled 7y ago
    I'm amazed when people assert stuff that is ludicrous on the face of it. Places that have signs that say "no Amex" because it's 1% more fees are also implementing Apple Pay ...
  - systemtest 7y ago
    This is very reasonable, given that the bank only needs to maintain an integration with Apple Pay and that they don't have to support and maintain an app and all kinds of devices. Apple does that for them.
- Ensorceled 7y ago
  That's not true, Apple Pay is competitive with other payment systems. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT204274 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT204274 Small business would absolutely not be implementing this if the take was 10%

aedron 7y ago

The EU has been making some good moves in opening up the payment services industry through regulation. The biggest example is the PSD2 regulations passed in 2015[1]. Among many other things, this law requires banks in the EU to expose APIs into their systems, that allow third parties to make transfers to and from the bank's accounts, only subject to proper customer authentication and AML compliance. This essentially lets third parties build universal payment services on top of existing banking infrastructure. > The law highlights the growing desire in Germany for tighter regulation of U.S. technology companies. No, this highlights that the EU is willing and able to regulate markets to keep them open to all participants. Looking forward to laws opening up this sector even more. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_Services_Directive#Revised_Directive_on_Payment_Services_(PSD2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_Services_Directive#Rev...

DavideNL 7y ago
I agree, this is a great development. Hope to see the same in other EU countries.
cprecioso 7y ago
PSD2 is great, but as far as I remember, it doesn't make banks have a common basic API, every bank can implement it wildly differently. Next step is something like OpenBanking in the UK which does ask for common APIs.
- grenoire 7y ago
  The next step is unfortunately not coming up anytime soon. They made account information and payment initiation service provider (AISP and PISP respectively) licensing mandatory to connect with banks, but most banks don't even have their APIs production-ready in time! Rabobank (Dutch) quoted to us the end of 2020 for their 'official' connection platform, but the requirements have been made legally binding in September...
giancarlostoro 7y ago
I was thinking about how much I would love it here in the US if I could have a one stop banking app for all my balances that isnt selling them to Facebook or something sketchy. I think open APIs would be the only way I would trust it. If I had the app source it would work for me. Even if I only have it for bigger banks I just want less apps and more uniformity.

jeroenhd 7y ago

Apple could've probably easily prevented this if they had allowed banking payment apps from the beginning, like Google did. Without an exclusive payment system, they would just be a payment alternative that would be way more user friendly than their competitors and everything would be dandy. I'd even consider it to be a reason to buy an iPhone, given their super simple UX flow compared to even the most user friendly bank apps. I hope not just Germany, but also the EU will take action against companies like Apple. These exclusive networks that serve no purpose other than vendor lock-in are a lose-lose scenario for customers and even the most rabid Apple fans should see how shitty their behaviour is. They've made their bed and now they will have to lie in it. Good on Germany for taking action.

systemtest 7y ago
I've seen the mess that banking apps on Android made. Not supporting certain phone models despite having NFC, needing a special SIM-card for the secure element, horrible UX. Multi-bank support meant switching between apps before payment. It's better now but far from perfect. The benefit of the Apple Wallet for customers is having all your cards in one app, available from the lock screen. The benefit to the bank is that they don't have to make an app, they just need the back-end integration with Apple Pay.
- jeroenhd 7y ago
  Of course some banks are shit. In some countries you can't log in to your bank without ActiveX. Most banks I've seen (in Europe, at least) are quite with the times and support basically any device with NFC. For Apple this is especially easy because there's only 6 models of phone to support with a single API. There's no way a bank app would drop support on a maintained iOS device. In my country, every bank has supported contactless payments for at least 3-4 years. My bank has a pretty nice UX, as do many of its competitors. Some other apps are more focused on security than user experience, which manifests itself in an irritating slow mess, but that's just another factor to take into account when picking a bank. A few months ago, the first bank in my country announced Apple pay support. Up till then, Apple customers have been behind the curve on simple features that even the cheapest Chinese phone had. Now that banks started supporting Apple Pay, every single customer, including me, is paying Apple for the extra fees that banks need to pay to Apple for integration (because they're not allowed to charge Apple customers directly). I don't have any Apple decides whatsoever and so do most households I know of, yet we're all funding Apple's little money making scheme. The benefit of Apple wallet is the same as the benefit for Google Pay and people still use that despite bank apps existing on Android. If Apple Pay is better, customers wouldn't install separate bank apps and banks still wouldn't have to make apps. The result: customers have more choice, but now the responsibility for not bringing features to users lies with the bank instead of Apple. The real difference here is that Apple doesn't allow banks to compete on iOS devices because Apple wants a portion of all payments their customers make on their phones. No matter how fancy Apple's solution is, there's no excusing their anticompetitive restrictions on their app store from a consumer standpoint. The only defences I can think of are "I don't use bank apps so I don't care", "I don't trust my bank to make software but I don't care enough to switch" or "It's technically not illegal in most countries", all of which are pretty bad excuses in my opinion.

icebraining 7y ago

Does anyone know which law it is and can post an English translations? Feels like this HN thread will be too vacuous if we don't know what we're discussing.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
lorenzhs 7y ago
http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf from page 77, § 58a. IANAL but it looks like it matches the summary from the article pretty well. There are some exceptions, like if you can prove that opening it up would weaken the security. But it's rather clearly tailored to apply to Apple Pay. Here's a lightly touched-up translation courtesy of deepl.com -- not sure if the references made it intact (and pretty sure the legalese didn't), but it's using "clause" to refer to the numbered sub-paragraph things: § 58a: Access to technical infrastructure services in connection with the provision of payment services or the conduct of electronic money business (1) An enterprise which contributes to the provision of payment services or the operation of electronic money business in Germany through technical infrastructure services (system enterprise) shall be obliged, upon request of a payment service provider within the meaning of § 1 Clause 1 sentence 1 numbers 1 to 3 or of an electronic money issuer within the meaning of § 1 Clause 2 sentence 1 numbers 1 or 2, to make these technical infrastructure services available without delay and subject to reasonable fees and reasonable conditions of access. The provision within the meaning of sentence 1 must be designed in such a way that the requesting enterprise can provide or operate its payment services or electronic money transactions without hindrance. (2) Clause 1 shall not apply if, at the time of the request, the system operator is not a company whose technical infrastructure services are used by more than 10 payment service providers within the meaning of § 1 Clause 1 Sentence 1 Nos. 1 to 3 or e-money issuers within the meaning of § 1 Clause 2 Sentence 1 Nos. 1 or 2 or which has more than 2 million registered users. (3) In exceptional cases, the system operator shall not be obligated in accordance with Clause 1 if there are objectively justified reasons for refusing to make the service available. These are particularly present if the system enterprise can prove that the security and integrity of the technical infrastructure services is specifically endangered by the provision. The rejection must be comprehensibly justified. (4) If a system enterprise culpably infringes clause 1, it shall be obliged to compensate the inquiring enterprise for the resulting damage. The ordinary legal process is given. (5) The duties and responsibilities of the cartel authorities under the Act against Restraints of Competition shall remain unaffected.

thefounder 7y ago

>> We are surprised at how suddenly this legislation was introduced, Meanwhile we, the Apple clients are surprised why it took so long to pass this legislation. I still wonder why nothing is done against the appstore/google lock-in.

thierryzoller 7y ago

Sounds like this is just the Payment Service Directive ? Someone at APPLE must have slept while on the wheel for years.

unnouinceput 7y ago

"...could hurt data protection and the security of financial information. " Hahahahahaha, best joke I heard this month.

systemtest 7y ago

What would stop Apple from disabling NFC inside the German borders? Germans use cash for most payments, so they wouldn't lose too many customers.

C1sc0cat 7y ago

A motion Passed quickly late at night that doesn't seem at all odd. Given that Angle Merkal wanted it pulled (for good reasons) sounds like this was bounced though by either the greens or maybe by conservatives with input from the German backing sector

Notz 7y ago

Hi guys

classified 7y ago

Apple's complaints were predictable. If we let them, they'll also argue that hair loss or bad weather endanger the security of financial transactions.

edualm 7y ago

I don't see anything good coming out of this law, honestly. I've read some other commenters saying that Apple doesn't want to talk to small banks, but I find that to be the complete opposite of my experience. Here in Portugal, only one bank supports Apple Pay, and it's a small one (apart from N26/Revolut, the online ones). None of the bigger banks support it. Instead, they all support a national app that uses QR codes on iOS and NFC/QR on Android for payments (but its UX is much worse, even on Android where it uses NFC, and has a load of other problems - since it's properietary it doesn't work internationally, etc.). Of course, there is no Google Pay support at all here, and I blame the fact that NFC payments are supported on their own app. There's even less incentive for them to support Google Pay at all, and that's exactly what happened. I'm afraid that Apple Pay would be dropped if Apple was forced to open up NFC for payments.

BadThink6655321 7y ago

If Apple has to open their infrastructure then there needs to be reciprocity. I want Apple Pay. I don’t want Wal-Mart pay, Starbucks pay, CurrentC, ...

kayoone 7y ago

I would not be surprised if instead of complying, Apple would just disable ApplePay for Germany altogether.