4 ms·

You’re misreading pretty much everything you’ve quoted from the DMA. > No, DMA wording made it very clear that it's about web browser engine. You follow this

You’re misreading pretty much everything you’ve quoted from the DMA. > No, DMA wording made it very clear that it's about web browser engine. You follow this up by quoting a clause that manages core platform services. What it says is: > The gatekeeper shall not require [people] to use, to offer or interoperate with [stuff] of that gatekeeper in the context of services provided by [third party devs] who use the gatekeeper’s core platform services. A good example where this is applicable is the App Store, which is designated as a core platform service. PWAs aren’t designated as core platform service and there’s also an argument to be made that web developers aren’t considered “third party devs” (or as the DMA calls them “business users” due to a lack of agreement between Apple and them. > And they cannot make self-preferencing on their products. Same here. This one is even narrower because it’s only limited to preferential treatment in the sense of “ranking and related indexing and crawling” > The gatekeeper shall not treat more favourably [in ranking and related stuff] [their own products and services] than [similar products and services by others] This applies to ranking apps in the App Store. It has no bearing whatsoever on PWAs unless somehow Apple starts ranking PWAs in a list and then chooses to rank their own PWAs higher. The other one is also much narrower than you’re reading it. > The gatekeeper [shall not prevent users from switching to and subscribing to different apps including browsers] This mainly pertains to setting default apps and switching default apps. This tangentially relates to PWAs, but installed PWAs are technically not run in Safari and instead in their own app that uses WebKit under the hood, so it’s not so clear if this would apply to PWAs. > There's no room for this kind of interpretation in the view of enforcement entity. Apple is just trying to buy time by pretending ignorance. I can’t distill a lifetime worth of legal experience into a tangible piece of evidence nor are there readily available authoritative sources on compliance with government regulation narrow and simple enough that I can just present them without much worry of you understanding them, especially since you’re already struggling with, what is considered in European legal standards, rather straightforward legal text. So all I have is a trust me bro, and perhaps an appeal to common sense: Apple’s lawyers didn’t just wake up today and said to themselves “You know what, we were too cautious with interpreting the DMA a couple of weeks ago, I’m sure it’ll be fine if we keep PWA installs without implementing a way for other browsers to install them as well”, much less a variation in which they are trying to buy time by feigning ignorance. We already know that the EU reached out to Apple about disabling PWA installs. So with that in mind, do you think the lawyers woke up one day and said “fuck it” or do you think it’s more likely the lawyers gave the go ahead after the EU told them that PWA installs as implemented in iOS are beyond the scope of the DMA?

EMIRELADERO 3y ago
> A good example where this is applicable is the App Store, which is designated as a core platform service. PWAs aren’t designated as core platform service and there’s also an argument to be made that web developers aren’t considered “third party devs” (or as the DMA calls them “business users” due to a lack of agreement between Apple and them. The core platform service in this case would be iOS itself. Also, nowhere in the DMA does it say that there must be a contractual relationship between an entity and the gatekeeper in order for the former to be considered a business user. Windows is a designated CPS under the DMA and no contract with MS is required in order for you to make, distribute, and have your users run your software on their Windows PCs.
- turquoisevar 3y ago
  > The core platform service in this case would be iOS itself. You’re right, iOS is a CPS. But that doesn’t change much in the meaning of the provision, nor does it make it applicable to web developers. Specifically for iOS it would change to: > The gatekeeper shall not require [people] to use, to offer or interoperate with [stuff] of that gatekeeper in the context of services provided by [third party devs] who use [iOS]. The PWA engine is a core part of the iOS operating system, so there is no “us[ing]” “offer[ing]” or “interoperat[ing]” with other stuff. But the point below is more relevant here. > Also, nowhere in the DMA does it say that there must be a contractual relationship between an entity and the gatekeeper in order for the former to be considered a business user. True, I’m skipping the minutiae and going straight with the end conclusion. Article 2 of the DMA contains all definitions. For business users it states under clause 21: > 'business user' means any natural or legal person acting in a commercial or professional capacity using core platform services for the purpose of or in the course of providing goods or services to end users The CPS in this instance is not iOS because iOS isn’t used in the course of providing goods and services nor for the purposes stated above nor can it be used for those purposes. The CPS in question is as defined under clause (2)(a), namely an intermediary service, more precisely, the App Store. And Apple only allows usage of the App Store (and its IP needed to make apps) when under contract. The DMA does not prohibit this, because doing so would be nationalizing private property. Ipso facto, business users are under contract and web developers aren’t “business users” as defined under the DMA. Hence the main clause in question, the one clarified at the top, doesn’t apply to PWA developers. > Windows is a designated CPS under the DMA and no contract with MS is required in order for you to make, distribute, and have your users run your software on their Windows PCs. That’s not a consequence of the DMA, it’s a consequence of Microsoft not monetizing their IP in that way.

EMIRELADERO 3y ago

> A good example where this is applicable is the App Store, which is designated as a core platform service. PWAs aren’t designated as core platform service and there’s also an argument to be made that web developers aren’t considered “third party devs” (or as the DMA calls them “business users” due to a lack of agreement between Apple and them. The core platform service in this case would be iOS itself. Also, nowhere in the DMA does it say that there must be a contractual relationship between an entity and the gatekeeper in order for the former to be considered a business user. Windows is a designated CPS under the DMA and no contract with MS is required in order for you to make, distribute, and have your users run your software on their Windows PCs.

turquoisevar 3y ago
> The core platform service in this case would be iOS itself. You’re right, iOS is a CPS. But that doesn’t change much in the meaning of the provision, nor does it make it applicable to web developers. Specifically for iOS it would change to: > The gatekeeper shall not require [people] to use, to offer or interoperate with [stuff] of that gatekeeper in the context of services provided by [third party devs] who use [iOS]. The PWA engine is a core part of the iOS operating system, so there is no “us[ing]” “offer[ing]” or “interoperat[ing]” with other stuff. But the point below is more relevant here. > Also, nowhere in the DMA does it say that there must be a contractual relationship between an entity and the gatekeeper in order for the former to be considered a business user. True, I’m skipping the minutiae and going straight with the end conclusion. Article 2 of the DMA contains all definitions. For business users it states under clause 21: > 'business user' means any natural or legal person acting in a commercial or professional capacity using core platform services for the purpose of or in the course of providing goods or services to end users The CPS in this instance is not iOS because iOS isn’t used in the course of providing goods and services nor for the purposes stated above nor can it be used for those purposes. The CPS in question is as defined under clause (2)(a), namely an intermediary service, more precisely, the App Store. And Apple only allows usage of the App Store (and its IP needed to make apps) when under contract. The DMA does not prohibit this, because doing so would be nationalizing private property. Ipso facto, business users are under contract and web developers aren’t “business users” as defined under the DMA. Hence the main clause in question, the one clarified at the top, doesn’t apply to PWA developers. > Windows is a designated CPS under the DMA and no contract with MS is required in order for you to make, distribute, and have your users run your software on their Windows PCs. That’s not a consequence of the DMA, it’s a consequence of Microsoft not monetizing their IP in that way.