4 ms·
Apple’s onerous terms really seem like they’d run afoul of part 70 of the preamble of the DMA: > Given the substantial economic power of gatekeepers, it is imp
by infotainment 3y ago
Apple’s onerous terms really seem like they’d run afoul of part 70 of the preamble of the DMA:
> Given the substantial economic power of gatekeepers, it is important that the obligations are applied effectively and are not circumvented. To that end, the rules in question should apply to any practice by a gatekeeper, irrespective of its form and irrespective of whether it is of a contractual, commercial, technical or any other nature, insofar as the practice corresponds to the type of practice that is the subject of one of the obligations laid down by this Regulation.
Full text:
https://www.eu-digital-markets-act.com/Digital_Markets_Act_Preamble_61_to_70.html https://www.eu-digital-markets-act.com/Digital_Markets_Act_P...
- c0balt 3y agoWe can expect any lawsuits around the enforcement of the DMA to take years though. At least that's how it has happened in practice in the EU when a tech company meets new, unfavorable regulation. If you can't just slap them with a fine, e.g., privacy related stuff, you will have to take the long way through courts.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> can expect any lawsuits around the enforcement of the DMA to take years Wouldn't damages be expected if the courts rule adversely? At least in America, if Apple's actions were shown to be illegal, developers would have a claim as a class to damages.
- simfree 3y agoAre those damages less than the money that Apple would make by imposing these terms? There are lots of potential use cases like an F-Droid equivalent which cannot be shipped on iOS with these current terms, but the actual commercial damages are fairly minimal if this were to go to court since stores like F-Droid are not run for profit.