18 ms·

EU to hit Apple with first ever fine in €500M penalty over music streaming

267 points by mraniki 3y ago

nodesocket 3y ago
Keep it up EU and Apple will leave completely. How many fines has the EU levied against US tech companies as a money grab?
- sircastor 3y ago
  I would really like to see if this is a stand Apple could or would make. Apple obviously thinks it has a lot of power, but does it think it could wholesale exit a market? Apple's introduction of alternative app market rules (and the fees they intend to charge for them) shows that Apple is willing to follow the rule, but make it painful enough that few would take that alternative. I doubt they'd leave the market entirely, but obviously they're willing to test the resolve of the EU's law and rulings.
- sensanaty 3y ago
  I'd kill to see Apple pull out of the world's 2nd largest market over their monopolistic bullshit. Though we both know the psychopathic C-suites & their shareholders would crucify Tik Apple if they pulled out, so there's no chance that's happening, especially with these pathetic fines.
mraniki 3y ago
[flagged]
- lapcat 3y ago
  Be careful, this link is making connections to adsco.re on non-http ports and also scanning localhost. https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/detections/adsco-re https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/detections/adsco-re
  - delfinom 3y ago
    Yea that archive service is very often infected by some sort of malware on their individual servers
drooopy 3y ago
Nearly twenty five years ago, the DoJ nearly split Microsoft into two companies due to them abusing their position as an ecosystem gatekeeper. How did we go from that to the point where apple (or google even), acting both as gatekeeper and direct competitor, can dictate how another company can communicate things to its end users/customers?
- fennecfoxy 3y ago
  He he, it'll be tough for that to happen to Apple, as Apple has become a protected class in their customers' minds, imo.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  Probably because unlike 25 years ago, US lawmakers and enforcers, realized a large chunk of their economic dominance is dependent on big-tech abusing their market position as gatekeepers, so they intentionally look away when they see how much of their GDP these companies bring in, not to mention aiding the US dragnet mass-surveillance capabilities being the icing on the cake. What else are they gonna do to earn $? It's not like the world is lining up to buy their ultra reliable and high quality cars and planes. Sorry for the tongue in cheek.
  - lapcat 3y ago
    That's a nice sounding story, but what actually happened was that George W. Bush was awarded the Presidency after a 5-4 Supreme Court vote stopped the recount in Florida, and the Bush DoJ announced a slap on the wrist for Microsoft just a few days before 9/11, which wiped the story off the map, and everyone forgot. (I'm not suggesting a 9/11 conspiracy, by the way.)
    - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
      So Bush is to blame for the war on terror AND for failing to regulate Microsoft? Wow, just when I thought that being a war criminal was enough of a reason to be hated, now comes the cherry on top.
    - 3y ago
udev4096 3y ago
https://archive.ph/hugEh https://archive.ph/hugEh
Towaway69 3y ago
I always wonder what happens with these fines. Does it get absorbed into the EU budget? Does it go to the customers/citizens who were disadvantaged? Or does it go schools or the disadvantaged? Does Apple actually pay or does this end an endless court cases and thereby the fine is absorbed by the lawyers?
- Someone 3y ago
  Site is paywalled so I couldn’t check what they’re fined about, but https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/index/fines_en https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/index/fines_en probably applies. It certainly is in line with what I think happens with EU fines. It says: “Fines imposed on undertakings found in breach of EU antitrust rules are paid into the general EU budget. This money is not earmarked for particular expenses, but Member States' contributions to the EU budget for the following year are reduced accordingly. The fines therefore help to finance the EU and reduce the burden for taxpayers.”
  - Towaway69 3y ago
    Thank you for the details but it does mean a EU tax payer working at Apple would have a conflict of interest ;) Edit: EU tax payer, not all tax payers.
    - bryanrasmussen 3y ago
      pretty sure taxes will not be decreased, but more projects will become possible.
    - madsbuch 3y ago
      *EU Tax payer I find the thought entertaining that an high ranking EU employee would actively work for initiatives that would elevate fines to their employer. I do think said person would gain more by lobbying for more direct salary than indirect salary shared with more than 300 million other EU citizens.
    - lucianbr 3y ago
      So would a US tax payer. Just he would be incentivised to trigger a US fine on Apple instead of a EU fine. So would a Japanese, or any tax payer, really. How did you come up with the idea that this is EU specific?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
neodymiumphish 3y ago
What’s strange is that this wasn’t a rule imposed just against Apple’s competitors. This rule applies to all apps on the store. The idea that they feel justified in imposing a fine specific to the music streaming apps seems like they’re hiding the ball a bit.
- withinboredom 3y ago
  It just means that when someone else comes forward to complain about the same thing in another industry, they can fine them again for basically the same thing.
- whazor 3y ago
  Spotify is the company that filed the complaint against Apple. What I find interesting is that the article doesn’t mention Apple Music, which is a competitor of Spotify. For Spotify it is unfair that they need to pay a 30% fee, while Apple Music doesn’t need to. Thus for 8$ per month, you would get more music. The problem seems not to be the fee, but that Spotify cannot promote its own payment service.
  - neodymiumphish 3y ago
    So Apple should be forced to allow Spotify to offer a payment alternative outside of the App Store? Should this allowance be made for just services competing with Apple, or should we be allowed to dictate how Apple does their business across the board? Slack doesn’t compete with Apple directly, should they be allowed to sue over the 30% fee?
    - a_wild_dandan 3y ago
      Smartphones are just small PCs with touch screens. They should have similar vendor/customer dynamics: no app store monopoly, no inserting yourself in my private business transactions to extort some rent seeking 30% middleman fee, etc. The present behavior of this "mobile PC" duopoly is absolutely nuts, and needs a reckoning for their anti-consumer behavior.
wslh 3y ago
I think the EU has really hit the jackpot with Apple, Google, and the like. It's not that these big players don't deserve a slap on the wrist; it's more about how long the EU waited to act and the deafening silence before now. Remember the Microsoft antitrust drama in 2001? [1] That saga said more about the political games than anything to do with Microsoft breaking the rules. It feels like today's crackdowns on the tech giants are more about putting on a show than enforcing the law fairly. I'm just hoping the EU doesn't decide we need another annoying pop-up or something. We've got enough of those already. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
- tomas789 3y ago
  I don’t know about milk cow. This is peanuts in the whole EU budget. I think that EU needs to keep a strong position to be compelling for many people. Therwise many might start to see it as an irrelevant institution.
  - wslh 3y ago
    Why now and not years before? As web users, daily, we see all kind of blatant abuses that EU (and USA...) don't see. BTW, the EU has been quasi irrelevant in realpolitik terms.
    - shafyy 3y ago
      In the article, it says that Spotify filed the complained in 2019 and these big cases can take a long time. There's no big consipiracy theory, I'm sorry! > BTW, the EU has been quasi irrelevant in realpolitik terms. What?
      - wslh 3y ago
        This is not a conspiracy theory. Big cases shouldn't take a long time with the existing technology. It is on the political side to know how to execute laws faster. People around the world are silently accepting slow law systems instead of speeding them up. We are in 2024. BTW, I have experience working with lawyers and the legal system in significant cases. You will cry or laugh if you witness the processes and tools used.
amelius 3y ago
> “The App Store has helped Spotify become the top music streaming service across Europe and we hope the European Commission will end its pursuit of a complaint that has no merit.” Meanwhile, millions of developers helped the App Store become the top app store across the globe.
- kramerger 3y ago
  Wasn't Spotify world leading before first iPhone was announced? (ignoring illegal alternatives obviously)
  - qingcharles 3y ago
    Spotify was late to the market, though? I was running a paid streaming catalog for all the major labels in late 1999/early 2000, and Apple was following us into every meeting with the labels.
  - micwag 3y ago
    Spotify and the iPhone were independently launched around the same time. Spotify back then was developed as the answer against illegal alternatives.
    - FireBeyond 3y ago
      The App Store didn't come out until nearly 2 1/2 years after Spotify, though.
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        Not true, iOS App Store came out Jul 2008. Spotify came out 2010 in UK and 2011 in USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple)
        Jensson 3y ago
        In Sweden it was launched 2008, first iphone was announced 2007, so yeah certainly wasn't world leading before the first iphone announcement.
udev4096 3y ago
[flagged]
- withinboredom 3y ago
  Not really a secret and big tech could just follow the rules. It's not that hard.
  - wepple 3y ago
    > big tech could just follow the rules. It's not that hard. The EU can create new rules out of thin air with arbitrary timelines to implement. It wouldn’t characterize it as “not that hard”.
    - withinboredom 3y ago
      Let me put it this way: the rules shouldn't even have to exist. They only have to exist because the companies got greedy.
    - awesomeMilou 3y ago
      > The EU can create new rules out of thin air with arbitrary timelines to implement. Yes, it's called the legislative arm of government and it's usually where new laws are passed. I'm sure it must seem like a novel concept to some people, but once you live here you get used to it!
    - LunaSea 3y ago
      Why is the state bothering me about all these murder shenanigans I'm getting accused of. All these pesky rules to follow are getting out of hand...
- sdfhbdf 3y ago
  if you look at any eu member state’s annual budget 1.1bn is not that much. For example social security in Germany is around 239bb annually (https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/cabinet-federal-budget-2024-2200642 https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/cabinet-federal-...) i don’t think it boosts the economy
retskrad 3y ago
Apple appears to be following a trajectory reminiscent of Microsoft's pre-Satya Nadella era. Apple’s myopic focus on safeguarding its only growing revenue stream, the App Store, coupled with hubris in its dealings with developers and an abrasive approach toward regulators, suggests potential challenges ahead. The optimism surrounding Tim Cook as the savior of Apple may be subject to reconsideration, as his tenure may not be remembered favorably. Under his leadership, Apple has seemingly become a crack head, getting high on the App Store revenue.
- factormeta 3y ago
  If Steve is the revolutionary, then Tim is the professional business/bureaucratic guy, whom I'm sure has optimized Apple a bunch from an operational and business perspective. And when you have a business person running for too long, the company is going to focus on maintaining what is the growing revenue stream, market share, etc.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    Researching and developing M processors allowing laptops unparalleled power relative to power usage, R&D for AirPods which apparently had sufficient utility to become quite popular, and R&D for Apple Watch which also became quite popular. Apparently, this qualifies as > Under his leadership, Apple has seemingly become a crack head, getting high on the App Store revenue. To some people… And also developing a new business creating and selling movies and tv shows.
    - ksec 3y ago
      >Researching and developing M processors allowing laptops unparalleled power relative to power usage, R&D for AirPods which apparently had sufficient utility to become quite popular, and R&D for Apple Watch which also became quite popular. What has any of that got to do with Tim Cook, when Tim Cook is not the one who leads of any of these? Apart from Apple Watch, the other two has much of the foundation built during Steve Jobs era.
sunshinerag 3y ago
EU innovating like the cookie consent laws.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
DueDilligence 3y ago
[dead]
londons_explore 3y ago
I'd like to see the EU fine companies based on the harm done worldwide, not just in the EU. But then allow Apple to decide to redirect some of that fine proportionally to over countries regulators (and if the other country doesn't want to take it, it is still owed to the EU). I think that would help level the playing field, where some (smaller) countries can be walked over by big tech companies because the country is incapable of flighting big companies.
whywhywhywhy 3y ago
[flagged]
- luuurker 3y ago
  It goes to the EU budget. They don't specify where the money goes to when issuing the fine for the same reason a cop doesn't tell you where the money from your speeding ticket is going to be spent on.
- EasyMark 3y ago
  these things usually just go back into a general fund; similar to how they do in the USA to avoid "we can charge these companies and get the money back into the department of * and get even bigger!" Well except for civil forfeiture, where they just basically rob people of things without proving anything of note and give the proceeds back to police departments.
llm_nerd 3y ago
Two things that are simultaneously true- -The EU has a really liberal policy of meting out massive fines to US companies, seemingly seeing them as free money -Apple is abusive, greedy and entitled and desperately needs to be checked. Apple's hubris (like "don't tell customers they can pay significantly less outside of the app") can only be defended by the Stockholm syndrome few who have deluded themselves into thinking this is rational or justified. It is plainly evident that Apple operates their actual app store team as a discount, rag-tag minimalist operation doing the absolute least possible, yet that yields a profit for them greater than the entire Citibank conglomerate. Just insane. Apple's take from the industry as rent-seeking is greater than entire industries, and we still pretend that it's some need. There is zero justification for the no-value rent-seeking Apple commits in the app store. And if you have loads of Apple devices in your world like me, seeing Apple saturate markets and start to have trouble growing their already insane profits should cause you some concern as now is when they're going to look to lean on their rent-seeking and "service" income sources more than ever.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- a_wild_dandan 3y ago
  Newton's 4th law: every huge business success causes an equal and opposite huge enshittification failure.
Fischgericht 3y ago
It's quite shocking what appears to be the common ground here. The EU has been trying to give users (YOU!) freedom of choice when it comes to YOUR personal data. But you are complaining that businesses tried to circumvent this with cookie banners? In this case the EU is trying to make sure there is COMPETITION, which benefits YOU. Capitalism, Free Markets, etc. Not a fan? And coming up next: The EU is trying to make sure that YOU are allowed to install any application you want on a device YOU own. Again, a device YOU own, not Apple. And this time around, Apple is going pure evil on this, by trying to force application stores offering open source (isn't this supposed to be a thing here, you know, HACKER news?) to pay them for allowing YOU to download a free open source app onto the device YOU OWN. Are you guys again going to defend them for that move? Apple has absolutely no legitimate reason for all of this. Not by any commonly known definition of the term "free market". There is so much shit going on here in my region (Central EU). There is a lot to complain about when it comes to the EU. But complaining about a governmental entity fighting for the rights of the people instead of the oligarchs for a change? Seriously, what's wrong with some of you guys? Do you really want to live in a world where a tiny number of mega corporations, some of them run by lunatics, are allowed to have full control over devices you own AND all of your personal data? I am SO looking forward to the EU smashing Apple to pieces for the disgusting stunt they are right now trying to prevent users getting back some control over their hardware. I would assume that a US-based hacker/nerd/tech enthusiast would respond to what the EU is trying to achieve here with: "Hey, why can't we over here also have some of that? Is it normal that OUR government is not fighting for our basic rights?". Sorry for the harsh words, but this really needed to be said. Some people really need a reality check and look at this site's title. No, it's not "i-want-musk-to-rule-the-world-and-eat-my-firstborn.com".
- betaby 3y ago
  > In this case the EU is trying to make sure there is COMPETITION, which benefits YOU. No, EU adds only bureaucracy and regulations. There won't be another 'EU Apple', quite the opposite. > I am SO looking forward to the EU smashing Apple to pieces Exactly this, you are not looking EU having their own companies of the Apple/Google scale. You are willing to smash something to pieces.
YetAnotherNick 3y ago
If EU's fines are based in global revenue percentage, then they shouldn't be the one collecting all the fines. If they act as a global messiah, they should distribute the fines and not use it for their own politics.
extraduder_ire 3y ago
Is this fine to be paid straight to the EU, or does Ireland collect it since Apple is based there?
moogly 3y ago
I would like to say that this is an unmeaningful amount of money for the people at Apple since they will make that in a couple of afternoons, and I wouldn't exactly be wrong, but I also know that these same petty people take this as a personal affront and will do their utmost to fight it, and be passive agressively patronizing about it.
crazygringo 3y ago
Why does this even require an antitrust probe? Why aren't there just clear laws against this stuff that Apple would never have done this in the first place, especially in the US where Apple is based? If I'm reading it correctly, the problem is that Apple Music and Spotify compete, but Apple Music gets preferential treatment, because: - Apple Music allows you to subscribe from within the app, and Apple isn't taking some % cut in the App Store from its own apps - Spotify can't afford to pay a % cut to the App Store, so not only do Spotify subscribers encounter a hurdle (can't pay from within the app), but Apple doesn't even allow Spotify to provide users with a link to pay on the website from within the app This is quite obviously completely unfair. But it seems like there aren't really laws directly against this thing. These investigations and court cases seem to be relying on other statutes around antitrust, anticompetitive behavior, etc., that aren't always clear. But today, app stores and platforms and marketplaces are a common thing, where Amazon sells its own products on Amazon, Apple sells is own apps on the App Store, Google lists its own websites on Search. Why isn't there incredibly specific and detailed legislation to prevent companies from favoring their own products in stores/platforms/marketplaces specifically? Why are we relying on outdated legislation that companies think there's a good chance won't apply to them if taken to court? In other words, why don't we have clear laws that would have prevented Apple from ever considering this self-preferential behavior in the first place? This seems like such a no-brainer for legislators. It doesn't even seem like a Republican thing or a Democrat thing where the other side would oppose it -- it just seems like a common-sense thing.
- miken123 3y ago
  You're talking about the Digital Markets Act (DMA) which will come into effect in the EU in about two weeks. It does exactly what you say, although Apple is still actively trying to sabotage it with a sloppy implementation. Hopefully the US will follow some day.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  Also why is it controversial? Apple has a marketplace and it has ToS that allow it to pull any app. What's next, they can't preinstall the Music app? I foresee some major enshittification of this ecosystem
laserDinosaur 3y ago
Percentage wise: If you were earning 150K per year, this fine would cost you $3,750.
- blululu 3y ago
  That is a huge fine.
  - a_wild_dandan 3y ago
    Yeah, that's 1 speeding fine/month. That would suck. Luckily for Apple, serial lawbreaking won't incur criminal charges...
brudgers 3y ago
For perspective: Last quarter, Apple had ~$120,000,000,000 in revenue. Or about $1,300,000,000 revenue per day. As I write this, the story has a '6 hours ago' HN timestamp. And Apple's revenue has almost equaled the fine since the story was posted. OK, but what about profit? Apple had $93,000,000,000 net revenue in 2023. Or about $250,000,000 per day. So the fine is about two days profit. Or around 0.5% of annual profit.
- SushiHippie 3y ago
  And in the EU† they had $30,397,000,000 net sales in 2023 [0], about $83,000,000 per day. Nearly a week of profit in the EU†. Around 1.6% of annual profit in the EU†. Even with only looking at the EU† sales, this does not seem to be that bad of a fine. [0] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy2024-q1/FY24_Q1_Consolidated_Financial_Statements.pdf https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy2024-q1/FY24_Q1_Consol... † I know that EU != Europe, but Apple does not report its sales split up by EU countries, so this is the best that I can get from the data available.
frank_bb 3y ago
[dead]
sharts 3y ago
500m is nothing except further incentive for them to continue doing what they are doing because this is pennies for them to do business. Not sure why this is even newsworthy. Anything less than 5 billion is kind of pointless.
ChildOfChaos 3y ago
This just seems like even more nonsense from the EU to generate money for themselves. What is the problem? I'm an Apple user on all my devices and I use Spotify for my music streaming without any issue from Apple. This seems somewhat unfair to Apple to me. It's not like they block Spotify, it's very easy to install, subscribe and use on Apple devices and everyone knows Spotify and that it exists, of course Apple are going to promote there own streaming service, that is just normal business. I don't buy a sandwich at a cafe and then have them try and offer me a drink for the cafe next door as another choice.

267 points by mraniki 3y ago

Keep it up EU and Apple will leave completely. How many fines has the EU levied against US tech companies as a money grab?

sircastor 3y ago
I would really like to see if this is a stand Apple could or would make. Apple obviously thinks it has a lot of power, but does it think it could wholesale exit a market? Apple's introduction of alternative app market rules (and the fees they intend to charge for them) shows that Apple is willing to follow the rule, but make it painful enough that few would take that alternative. I doubt they'd leave the market entirely, but obviously they're willing to test the resolve of the EU's law and rulings.
sensanaty 3y ago
I'd kill to see Apple pull out of the world's 2nd largest market over their monopolistic bullshit. Though we both know the psychopathic C-suites & their shareholders would crucify Tik Apple if they pulled out, so there's no chance that's happening, especially with these pathetic fines.

mraniki 3y ago

[flagged]

lapcat 3y ago
Be careful, this link is making connections to adsco.re on non-http ports and also scanning localhost. https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/detections/adsco-re https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/detections/adsco-re
- delfinom 3y ago
  Yea that archive service is very often infected by some sort of malware on their individual servers

drooopy 3y ago

Nearly twenty five years ago, the DoJ nearly split Microsoft into two companies due to them abusing their position as an ecosystem gatekeeper. How did we go from that to the point where apple (or google even), acting both as gatekeeper and direct competitor, can dictate how another company can communicate things to its end users/customers?

fennecfoxy 3y ago
He he, it'll be tough for that to happen to Apple, as Apple has become a protected class in their customers' minds, imo.
FirmwareBurner 3y ago
Probably because unlike 25 years ago, US lawmakers and enforcers, realized a large chunk of their economic dominance is dependent on big-tech abusing their market position as gatekeepers, so they intentionally look away when they see how much of their GDP these companies bring in, not to mention aiding the US dragnet mass-surveillance capabilities being the icing on the cake. What else are they gonna do to earn $? It's not like the world is lining up to buy their ultra reliable and high quality cars and planes. Sorry for the tongue in cheek.
- lapcat 3y ago
  That's a nice sounding story, but what actually happened was that George W. Bush was awarded the Presidency after a 5-4 Supreme Court vote stopped the recount in Florida, and the Bush DoJ announced a slap on the wrist for Microsoft just a few days before 9/11, which wiped the story off the map, and everyone forgot. (I'm not suggesting a 9/11 conspiracy, by the way.)
  - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    So Bush is to blame for the war on terror AND for failing to regulate Microsoft? Wow, just when I thought that being a war criminal was enough of a reason to be hated, now comes the cherry on top.
  - 3y ago

udev4096 3y ago

https://archive.ph/hugEh https://archive.ph/hugEh

Towaway69 3y ago

I always wonder what happens with these fines. Does it get absorbed into the EU budget? Does it go to the customers/citizens who were disadvantaged? Or does it go schools or the disadvantaged? Does Apple actually pay or does this end an endless court cases and thereby the fine is absorbed by the lawyers?

Someone 3y ago
Site is paywalled so I couldn’t check what they’re fined about, but https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/index/fines_en https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/index/fines_en probably applies. It certainly is in line with what I think happens with EU fines. It says: “Fines imposed on undertakings found in breach of EU antitrust rules are paid into the general EU budget. This money is not earmarked for particular expenses, but Member States' contributions to the EU budget for the following year are reduced accordingly. The fines therefore help to finance the EU and reduce the burden for taxpayers.”
- Towaway69 3y ago
  Thank you for the details but it does mean a EU tax payer working at Apple would have a conflict of interest ;) Edit: EU tax payer, not all tax payers.
  - bryanrasmussen 3y ago
    pretty sure taxes will not be decreased, but more projects will become possible.
  - madsbuch 3y ago
    *EU Tax payer I find the thought entertaining that an high ranking EU employee would actively work for initiatives that would elevate fines to their employer. I do think said person would gain more by lobbying for more direct salary than indirect salary shared with more than 300 million other EU citizens.
  - lucianbr 3y ago
    So would a US tax payer. Just he would be incentivised to trigger a US fine on Apple instead of a EU fine. So would a Japanese, or any tax payer, really. How did you come up with the idea that this is EU specific?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

neodymiumphish 3y ago

What’s strange is that this wasn’t a rule imposed just against Apple’s competitors. This rule applies to all apps on the store. The idea that they feel justified in imposing a fine specific to the music streaming apps seems like they’re hiding the ball a bit.

withinboredom 3y ago
It just means that when someone else comes forward to complain about the same thing in another industry, they can fine them again for basically the same thing.
whazor 3y ago
Spotify is the company that filed the complaint against Apple. What I find interesting is that the article doesn’t mention Apple Music, which is a competitor of Spotify. For Spotify it is unfair that they need to pay a 30% fee, while Apple Music doesn’t need to. Thus for 8$ per month, you would get more music. The problem seems not to be the fee, but that Spotify cannot promote its own payment service.
- neodymiumphish 3y ago
  So Apple should be forced to allow Spotify to offer a payment alternative outside of the App Store? Should this allowance be made for just services competing with Apple, or should we be allowed to dictate how Apple does their business across the board? Slack doesn’t compete with Apple directly, should they be allowed to sue over the 30% fee?
  - a_wild_dandan 3y ago
    Smartphones are just small PCs with touch screens. They should have similar vendor/customer dynamics: no app store monopoly, no inserting yourself in my private business transactions to extort some rent seeking 30% middleman fee, etc. The present behavior of this "mobile PC" duopoly is absolutely nuts, and needs a reckoning for their anti-consumer behavior.

wslh 3y ago

I think the EU has really hit the jackpot with Apple, Google, and the like. It's not that these big players don't deserve a slap on the wrist; it's more about how long the EU waited to act and the deafening silence before now. Remember the Microsoft antitrust drama in 2001? [1] That saga said more about the political games than anything to do with Microsoft breaking the rules. It feels like today's crackdowns on the tech giants are more about putting on a show than enforcing the law fairly. I'm just hoping the EU doesn't decide we need another annoying pop-up or something. We've got enough of those already. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

tomas789 3y ago
I don’t know about milk cow. This is peanuts in the whole EU budget. I think that EU needs to keep a strong position to be compelling for many people. Therwise many might start to see it as an irrelevant institution.
- wslh 3y ago
  Why now and not years before? As web users, daily, we see all kind of blatant abuses that EU (and USA...) don't see. BTW, the EU has been quasi irrelevant in realpolitik terms.
  - shafyy 3y ago
    In the article, it says that Spotify filed the complained in 2019 and these big cases can take a long time. There's no big consipiracy theory, I'm sorry! > BTW, the EU has been quasi irrelevant in realpolitik terms. What?
    - wslh 3y ago
      This is not a conspiracy theory. Big cases shouldn't take a long time with the existing technology. It is on the political side to know how to execute laws faster. People around the world are silently accepting slow law systems instead of speeding them up. We are in 2024. BTW, I have experience working with lawyers and the legal system in significant cases. You will cry or laugh if you witness the processes and tools used.

amelius 3y ago

> “The App Store has helped Spotify become the top music streaming service across Europe and we hope the European Commission will end its pursuit of a complaint that has no merit.” Meanwhile, millions of developers helped the App Store become the top app store across the globe.

kramerger 3y ago
Wasn't Spotify world leading before first iPhone was announced? (ignoring illegal alternatives obviously)
- qingcharles 3y ago
  Spotify was late to the market, though? I was running a paid streaming catalog for all the major labels in late 1999/early 2000, and Apple was following us into every meeting with the labels.
- micwag 3y ago
  Spotify and the iPhone were independently launched around the same time. Spotify back then was developed as the answer against illegal alternatives.
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    The App Store didn't come out until nearly 2 1/2 years after Spotify, though.
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      Not true, iOS App Store came out Jul 2008. Spotify came out 2010 in UK and 2011 in USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple)
      - Jensson 3y ago
        In Sweden it was launched 2008, first iphone was announced 2007, so yeah certainly wasn't world leading before the first iphone announcement.

udev4096 3y ago

[flagged]

withinboredom 3y ago
Not really a secret and big tech could just follow the rules. It's not that hard.
- wepple 3y ago
  > big tech could just follow the rules. It's not that hard. The EU can create new rules out of thin air with arbitrary timelines to implement. It wouldn’t characterize it as “not that hard”.
  - withinboredom 3y ago
    Let me put it this way: the rules shouldn't even have to exist. They only have to exist because the companies got greedy.
  - awesomeMilou 3y ago
    > The EU can create new rules out of thin air with arbitrary timelines to implement. Yes, it's called the legislative arm of government and it's usually where new laws are passed. I'm sure it must seem like a novel concept to some people, but once you live here you get used to it!
  - LunaSea 3y ago
    Why is the state bothering me about all these murder shenanigans I'm getting accused of. All these pesky rules to follow are getting out of hand...
sdfhbdf 3y ago
if you look at any eu member state’s annual budget 1.1bn is not that much. For example social security in Germany is around 239bb annually (https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/cabinet-federal-budget-2024-2200642 https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/cabinet-federal-...) i don’t think it boosts the economy

retskrad 3y ago

Apple appears to be following a trajectory reminiscent of Microsoft's pre-Satya Nadella era. Apple’s myopic focus on safeguarding its only growing revenue stream, the App Store, coupled with hubris in its dealings with developers and an abrasive approach toward regulators, suggests potential challenges ahead. The optimism surrounding Tim Cook as the savior of Apple may be subject to reconsideration, as his tenure may not be remembered favorably. Under his leadership, Apple has seemingly become a crack head, getting high on the App Store revenue.

factormeta 3y ago
If Steve is the revolutionary, then Tim is the professional business/bureaucratic guy, whom I'm sure has optimized Apple a bunch from an operational and business perspective. And when you have a business person running for too long, the company is going to focus on maintaining what is the growing revenue stream, market share, etc.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Researching and developing M processors allowing laptops unparalleled power relative to power usage, R&D for AirPods which apparently had sufficient utility to become quite popular, and R&D for Apple Watch which also became quite popular. Apparently, this qualifies as > Under his leadership, Apple has seemingly become a crack head, getting high on the App Store revenue. To some people… And also developing a new business creating and selling movies and tv shows.
  - ksec 3y ago
    >Researching and developing M processors allowing laptops unparalleled power relative to power usage, R&D for AirPods which apparently had sufficient utility to become quite popular, and R&D for Apple Watch which also became quite popular. What has any of that got to do with Tim Cook, when Tim Cook is not the one who leads of any of these? Apart from Apple Watch, the other two has much of the foundation built during Steve Jobs era.

sunshinerag 3y ago

EU innovating like the cookie consent laws.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

DueDilligence 3y ago

[dead]

londons_explore 3y ago

I'd like to see the EU fine companies based on the harm done worldwide, not just in the EU. But then allow Apple to decide to redirect some of that fine proportionally to over countries regulators (and if the other country doesn't want to take it, it is still owed to the EU). I think that would help level the playing field, where some (smaller) countries can be walked over by big tech companies because the country is incapable of flighting big companies.

whywhywhywhy 3y ago

[flagged]

luuurker 3y ago
It goes to the EU budget. They don't specify where the money goes to when issuing the fine for the same reason a cop doesn't tell you where the money from your speeding ticket is going to be spent on.
EasyMark 3y ago
these things usually just go back into a general fund; similar to how they do in the USA to avoid "we can charge these companies and get the money back into the department of * and get even bigger!" Well except for civil forfeiture, where they just basically rob people of things without proving anything of note and give the proceeds back to police departments.

llm_nerd 3y ago

Two things that are simultaneously true- -The EU has a really liberal policy of meting out massive fines to US companies, seemingly seeing them as free money -Apple is abusive, greedy and entitled and desperately needs to be checked. Apple's hubris (like "don't tell customers they can pay significantly less outside of the app") can only be defended by the Stockholm syndrome few who have deluded themselves into thinking this is rational or justified. It is plainly evident that Apple operates their actual app store team as a discount, rag-tag minimalist operation doing the absolute least possible, yet that yields a profit for them greater than the entire Citibank conglomerate. Just insane. Apple's take from the industry as rent-seeking is greater than entire industries, and we still pretend that it's some need. There is zero justification for the no-value rent-seeking Apple commits in the app store. And if you have loads of Apple devices in your world like me, seeing Apple saturate markets and start to have trouble growing their already insane profits should cause you some concern as now is when they're going to look to lean on their rent-seeking and "service" income sources more than ever.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
a_wild_dandan 3y ago
Newton's 4th law: every huge business success causes an equal and opposite huge enshittification failure.

Fischgericht 3y ago

It's quite shocking what appears to be the common ground here. The EU has been trying to give users (YOU!) freedom of choice when it comes to YOUR personal data. But you are complaining that businesses tried to circumvent this with cookie banners? In this case the EU is trying to make sure there is COMPETITION, which benefits YOU. Capitalism, Free Markets, etc. Not a fan? And coming up next: The EU is trying to make sure that YOU are allowed to install any application you want on a device YOU own. Again, a device YOU own, not Apple. And this time around, Apple is going pure evil on this, by trying to force application stores offering open source (isn't this supposed to be a thing here, you know, HACKER news?) to pay them for allowing YOU to download a free open source app onto the device YOU OWN. Are you guys again going to defend them for that move? Apple has absolutely no legitimate reason for all of this. Not by any commonly known definition of the term "free market". There is so much shit going on here in my region (Central EU). There is a lot to complain about when it comes to the EU. But complaining about a governmental entity fighting for the rights of the people instead of the oligarchs for a change? Seriously, what's wrong with some of you guys? Do you really want to live in a world where a tiny number of mega corporations, some of them run by lunatics, are allowed to have full control over devices you own AND all of your personal data? I am SO looking forward to the EU smashing Apple to pieces for the disgusting stunt they are right now trying to prevent users getting back some control over their hardware. I would assume that a US-based hacker/nerd/tech enthusiast would respond to what the EU is trying to achieve here with: "Hey, why can't we over here also have some of that? Is it normal that OUR government is not fighting for our basic rights?". Sorry for the harsh words, but this really needed to be said. Some people really need a reality check and look at this site's title. No, it's not "i-want-musk-to-rule-the-world-and-eat-my-firstborn.com".

betaby 3y ago
> In this case the EU is trying to make sure there is COMPETITION, which benefits YOU. No, EU adds only bureaucracy and regulations. There won't be another 'EU Apple', quite the opposite. > I am SO looking forward to the EU smashing Apple to pieces Exactly this, you are not looking EU having their own companies of the Apple/Google scale. You are willing to smash something to pieces.

YetAnotherNick 3y ago

If EU's fines are based in global revenue percentage, then they shouldn't be the one collecting all the fines. If they act as a global messiah, they should distribute the fines and not use it for their own politics.

extraduder_ire 3y ago

Is this fine to be paid straight to the EU, or does Ireland collect it since Apple is based there?

moogly 3y ago

I would like to say that this is an unmeaningful amount of money for the people at Apple since they will make that in a couple of afternoons, and I wouldn't exactly be wrong, but I also know that these same petty people take this as a personal affront and will do their utmost to fight it, and be passive agressively patronizing about it.

crazygringo 3y ago

Why does this even require an antitrust probe? Why aren't there just clear laws against this stuff that Apple would never have done this in the first place, especially in the US where Apple is based? If I'm reading it correctly, the problem is that Apple Music and Spotify compete, but Apple Music gets preferential treatment, because: - Apple Music allows you to subscribe from within the app, and Apple isn't taking some % cut in the App Store from its own apps - Spotify can't afford to pay a % cut to the App Store, so not only do Spotify subscribers encounter a hurdle (can't pay from within the app), but Apple doesn't even allow Spotify to provide users with a link to pay on the website from within the app This is quite obviously completely unfair. But it seems like there aren't really laws directly against this thing. These investigations and court cases seem to be relying on other statutes around antitrust, anticompetitive behavior, etc., that aren't always clear. But today, app stores and platforms and marketplaces are a common thing, where Amazon sells its own products on Amazon, Apple sells is own apps on the App Store, Google lists its own websites on Search. Why isn't there incredibly specific and detailed legislation to prevent companies from favoring their own products in stores/platforms/marketplaces specifically? Why are we relying on outdated legislation that companies think there's a good chance won't apply to them if taken to court? In other words, why don't we have clear laws that would have prevented Apple from ever considering this self-preferential behavior in the first place? This seems like such a no-brainer for legislators. It doesn't even seem like a Republican thing or a Democrat thing where the other side would oppose it -- it just seems like a common-sense thing.

miken123 3y ago
You're talking about the Digital Markets Act (DMA) which will come into effect in the EU in about two weeks. It does exactly what you say, although Apple is still actively trying to sabotage it with a sloppy implementation. Hopefully the US will follow some day.
throwaway290 3y ago
Also why is it controversial? Apple has a marketplace and it has ToS that allow it to pull any app. What's next, they can't preinstall the Music app? I foresee some major enshittification of this ecosystem

laserDinosaur 3y ago

Percentage wise: If you were earning 150K per year, this fine would cost you $3,750.

blululu 3y ago
That is a huge fine.
- a_wild_dandan 3y ago
  Yeah, that's 1 speeding fine/month. That would suck. Luckily for Apple, serial lawbreaking won't incur criminal charges...

brudgers 3y ago

For perspective: Last quarter, Apple had ~$120,000,000,000 in revenue. Or about $1,300,000,000 revenue per day. As I write this, the story has a '6 hours ago' HN timestamp. And Apple's revenue has almost equaled the fine since the story was posted. OK, but what about profit? Apple had $93,000,000,000 net revenue in 2023. Or about $250,000,000 per day. So the fine is about two days profit. Or around 0.5% of annual profit.

SushiHippie 3y ago
And in the EU† they had $30,397,000,000 net sales in 2023 [0], about $83,000,000 per day. Nearly a week of profit in the EU†. Around 1.6% of annual profit in the EU†. Even with only looking at the EU† sales, this does not seem to be that bad of a fine. [0] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy2024-q1/FY24_Q1_Consolidated_Financial_Statements.pdf https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy2024-q1/FY24_Q1_Consol... † I know that EU != Europe, but Apple does not report its sales split up by EU countries, so this is the best that I can get from the data available.

frank_bb 3y ago

[dead]

sharts 3y ago

500m is nothing except further incentive for them to continue doing what they are doing because this is pennies for them to do business. Not sure why this is even newsworthy. Anything less than 5 billion is kind of pointless.

ChildOfChaos 3y ago

This just seems like even more nonsense from the EU to generate money for themselves. What is the problem? I'm an Apple user on all my devices and I use Spotify for my music streaming without any issue from Apple. This seems somewhat unfair to Apple to me. It's not like they block Spotify, it's very easy to install, subscribe and use on Apple devices and everyone knows Spotify and that it exists, of course Apple are going to promote there own streaming service, that is just normal business. I don't buy a sandwich at a cafe and then have them try and offer me a drink for the cafe next door as another choice.