4 ms·
This is a really good answer. > Apple has argued they do not sell a piece of hardware, but a platform. This is exactly where the EU goes in and say that respo
by madsbuch 3y ago
This is a really good answer.
> Apple has argued they do not sell a piece of hardware, but a platform.
This is exactly where the EU goes in and say that responsibilities follow when you sell a platform and you need to act responsibly in the market - Apple just acts up instead of accepting that they did not behave correctly, like a child.
The EU has even specified what it means to act reasonably in the market through DMA.
- xvector 3y agoThe DMA is bizarrely protectionist and kind of a farce. Why doesn't it apply to Spotify? Ask any artist if Spotify should constitute a monopoly under the DMA.
- smoldesu 3y ago> Why doesn't it apply to Spotify? Their infographic explains it nicely: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/image/content/2024_apple-music_infographic_en.jpg https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/image/conten...
- xvector 3y agoSpotify is absolutely a market-making monopolistic platform all on its own. The DMA has been gerrymandered to conveniently exclude it.
- smoldesu 3y agoYou're not entirely wrong, but the DMA isn't a response to the existence of music streaming apps. It's a direct and targeted remediation to Apple's uniquely oppressive behavior, and would apply to Spotify too should they do the same thing. It doesn't protect Spotify from future litigation in any way, and in many ways limits their business prospects. We might see legislation against Spotify someday, but it would have to be drastically different to account for Spotify's own unique damages. Plus, compared to Apple's impact on the market at-large, they're literal magnitudes smaller.