3 ms·

The key thing for the EU at this moment and more generally with its Big Tech regulation is establishing credibility. It's important that the corporates fear EU

The key thing for the EU at this moment and more generally with its Big Tech regulation is establishing credibility. It's important that the corporates fear EU sanctions and take EU regulation seriously. What the EU needs to do, even though it's not in its nature, is to make an example of someone. Apple would be the perfect target. If it did this it could have a lighter touch going forward because the corporates might self-regulate more, knowing they risk serious consequences. Probably won't happen but we'll see.

rjzzleep 3y ago
The EU unfortunately spent the last two years destroying it's credibility on the world stage. In both its legal institutions as well as its financial systems. We are indeed at a critical moment in the sense that they might still be a small window to turn things around, but as it stands, it seems like a parasite cannibalizing its host. Already we are seeing places that just don't care about complying with EU regulations anymore. Personally I had a little flicker of hope that they would force Apple to open its ecosystem, but it seems like that was just wishful thinking...
- mjburgess 3y ago
  1) the "EU" is not homogenous at any level. The regulators of tech seem much more anti-trust inclined than others. 2) Even if companies withdraw from the EU, the EU can still wreck their operations outside of the block in a large variety of ways. They could, eg., place DMA restrictions on what tech can be invested in by EU citizens -- then we're talking a massive loss of customers and FDI to the US. etc. etc. 3) Many US states, esp. california, will largely be copy/pasting this approach; as will many countries around the world. The EU is innovating and leading legislation, it is not an outlier. 4) If the EU is steamrolled, that will be a major worry of regulators elsewhere. Other countries (, states) will end up being much more draconian to prevent it. Consider, eg., many regs in california being actually more restirctive than those in the EU (child safety, etc.
mstolpm 3y ago
EU regulations are very messy and DMA doesn't seem to be different. There are so many loop holes in the regulation that the "intention" and the effect are in part disjunct. See the GDPR and cookie laws: End users should have been protected, but big companies (not only Meta et al, but e.g. German media corporations) are finding ways to "comply" and screw the users at the same time. Cookie consent is a mess. On the other hand, small businesses are struggling to comply and fear getting fined or getting an "Abmahnung" from a competitor. The new rule that requests electronic invoicing (ZUGFeRD) is a welcome step towards more digitalization, but requests a human readable PDF with an embedded XML containing the structured invoice. The regulations require a human (!) to ensure that the PDF and XML match. Anyone who has ever worked with XML knows that a freelancer or small business outside of IT services doesn't have the knowledge and ability to do so. Again, they have to rely on external tools and services that not only imply costs, but themselves don't guarantee compliance. Now the DMA. Regulations are welcome and needed for big players, but again, the rules seem to be arbitrary and full of loop holes. This is the EU and it already shows that the DMA leads to more fragmentation, both geographically (inside EU vs outside) as well as in the device space (iOS regulated, iPadOS not?). The relevant parts for AppStores ("Marketplaces") don't even mention the end user, but other competing market actors. Apple, Google, Meta all are interpreting the regulations different and of course "comply" in a way that favors their bottom line - of course, because the EU market is just a small portion of the revenue and the share holders would be angry if management would act different. And the end user already sees a growing enshitification in the EU: No more click through from Google search mini maps to Google Maps (no disadvantage for other maps providers). Browser choice menus with browsers nobody ever heard of. Requirements to accept new TOS without understanding what changed. Requests for "combining data" across services for "better experience"... But there is no mention of, for example, free side loading in the DMA, and no clear definition how to interpret the regulation. We had all this in the EU with "Windows N" editions: special editions of Windows for European countries with unbundled components and more "free choice". Nobody wanted them: neither customers nor OEMs. And they had more bugs that the regular versions and were hated by Microsoft as well. And we have seen the flaws of GDPR and cookie law in recent years. Oh, and we have seen huge fines for large corporations as well ... and years and years of fighting them in courts, often reducing the fines significantly. Moreover, the DMA mostly targets American "gate keepers" and this language already shows that the regulation is protective in its nature. It's interesting that even many US HN users hope for a strong reaction of the EU against Apple in particular, despite nobody has ever clearly shown the Apple has a monopoly in the EU or that customers were harmed. But what would the reaction if the EU would truly ban Apple from business in the EU or demand a split up? What would be the retaliations if the EU really tries to have the upper hand on how US corps can operate? And what would be the reaction of EU citizens if e.g. Apple, Meta oder Google would face a ban?

rjzzleep 3y ago

The EU unfortunately spent the last two years destroying it's credibility on the world stage. In both its legal institutions as well as its financial systems. We are indeed at a critical moment in the sense that they might still be a small window to turn things around, but as it stands, it seems like a parasite cannibalizing its host. Already we are seeing places that just don't care about complying with EU regulations anymore. Personally I had a little flicker of hope that they would force Apple to open its ecosystem, but it seems like that was just wishful thinking...

mjburgess 3y ago
1) the "EU" is not homogenous at any level. The regulators of tech seem much more anti-trust inclined than others. 2) Even if companies withdraw from the EU, the EU can still wreck their operations outside of the block in a large variety of ways. They could, eg., place DMA restrictions on what tech can be invested in by EU citizens -- then we're talking a massive loss of customers and FDI to the US. etc. etc. 3) Many US states, esp. california, will largely be copy/pasting this approach; as will many countries around the world. The EU is innovating and leading legislation, it is not an outlier. 4) If the EU is steamrolled, that will be a major worry of regulators elsewhere. Other countries (, states) will end up being much more draconian to prevent it. Consider, eg., many regs in california being actually more restirctive than those in the EU (child safety, etc.

mstolpm 3y ago

EU regulations are very messy and DMA doesn't seem to be different. There are so many loop holes in the regulation that the "intention" and the effect are in part disjunct. See the GDPR and cookie laws: End users should have been protected, but big companies (not only Meta et al, but e.g. German media corporations) are finding ways to "comply" and screw the users at the same time. Cookie consent is a mess. On the other hand, small businesses are struggling to comply and fear getting fined or getting an "Abmahnung" from a competitor. The new rule that requests electronic invoicing (ZUGFeRD) is a welcome step towards more digitalization, but requests a human readable PDF with an embedded XML containing the structured invoice. The regulations require a human (!) to ensure that the PDF and XML match. Anyone who has ever worked with XML knows that a freelancer or small business outside of IT services doesn't have the knowledge and ability to do so. Again, they have to rely on external tools and services that not only imply costs, but themselves don't guarantee compliance. Now the DMA. Regulations are welcome and needed for big players, but again, the rules seem to be arbitrary and full of loop holes. This is the EU and it already shows that the DMA leads to more fragmentation, both geographically (inside EU vs outside) as well as in the device space (iOS regulated, iPadOS not?). The relevant parts for AppStores ("Marketplaces") don't even mention the end user, but other competing market actors. Apple, Google, Meta all are interpreting the regulations different and of course "comply" in a way that favors their bottom line - of course, because the EU market is just a small portion of the revenue and the share holders would be angry if management would act different. And the end user already sees a growing enshitification in the EU: No more click through from Google search mini maps to Google Maps (no disadvantage for other maps providers). Browser choice menus with browsers nobody ever heard of. Requirements to accept new TOS without understanding what changed. Requests for "combining data" across services for "better experience"... But there is no mention of, for example, free side loading in the DMA, and no clear definition how to interpret the regulation. We had all this in the EU with "Windows N" editions: special editions of Windows for European countries with unbundled components and more "free choice". Nobody wanted them: neither customers nor OEMs. And they had more bugs that the regular versions and were hated by Microsoft as well. And we have seen the flaws of GDPR and cookie law in recent years. Oh, and we have seen huge fines for large corporations as well ... and years and years of fighting them in courts, often reducing the fines significantly. Moreover, the DMA mostly targets American "gate keepers" and this language already shows that the regulation is protective in its nature. It's interesting that even many US HN users hope for a strong reaction of the EU against Apple in particular, despite nobody has ever clearly shown the Apple has a monopoly in the EU or that customers were harmed. But what would the reaction if the EU would truly ban Apple from business in the EU or demand a split up? What would be the retaliations if the EU really tries to have the upper hand on how US corps can operate? And what would be the reaction of EU citizens if e.g. Apple, Meta oder Google would face a ban?