5 ms·
This isn't about music streaming but about the payment restrictions Apple forces on Appstore devs. The court decided that Apple's practices destroy competition,
by s1k3s 3y ago
This isn't about music streaming but about the payment restrictions Apple forces on Appstore devs. The court decided that Apple's practices destroy competition, which is obviously true. Also it's in line with the new gatekeeping laws that are coming this month.
- shadowfiend 3y agoEnforcing past behavior under laws that haven’t come into effect yet is not a great approach though…
- eigenspace 3y agoThese fines aren't through the new DMA. These fines are through preexisting regular antitrust laws.
- oaiey 3y agoThis argumentation is probably being based on generic anti trust law ... and the DMA is a new specialization below it. Does not mean that you violated past law just because new law is also applicable to you.
- madeofpalk 3y agoIt's actully a 15 year old law (in it's current name, originally from 1958). From the article: > Today's decision concludes that Apple's anti-steering provisions amount to unfair trading conditions, in breach of Article 102(a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU')
- todd-davies 3y agoThe specific guidelines that the Commission is relying on were written in 2006 [1]. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A52006XC0901%2801%29 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A...
- turquoisevar 3y agoYou seem to be confused with something else. This was about music streaming and no court was involved with this. This is a decision from an executive branch. The courts will come into play once Apple has filed their announced appeal.