3 ms·

Right; I think the correct frame is, major operating systems are utilities. They must be regulated the same way that all systemically important utilities are re

by 015a 3y ago

Right; I think the correct frame is, major operating systems are utilities. They must be regulated the same way that all systemically important utilities are regulated; heavily. Monopolies are natural, and arguably desirable, with utilities; but they need to be subject to extremely strong regulation to maintain the right balance. The DMA was always phrased from the wrong perspective (which is just classic EU, they literally cannot ever get regulation right). The correct phrasing is: once a computer operating system achieves a certain level of market adoption (say, 50M+ active installations), it is designated as a systemically critical operating system. Among other regulations, one thing systemically critical operating systems must allow is the independent and unrestricted installation and execution of applications from the internet. Regulating the market (App Store) itself is just dumb. Apple should not be forced to have Epic Games as a customer. It destroys trust in the App Store's review process, and legitimately does from my perspective infringe on Apple's rights as a business to do business with partners as they please. There's a gulf of difference between "forcing the App Store to distribute some application" and "allowing that application to be freely distributed on the internet". Regulation should be specifically targeted toward the second situation; and leave the App Store alone.

ncruces 3y ago
The EU did not compel Apple to have a comercial relationship with Epic. It is Apple who decided that third-party software distributers must comply with certain restrictions, and must sign a contract with them. And it was Apple which tried to prevent Epic from signing that contract, and who's now backtracking… before it's forced to do so by the EU.
arlcode 3y ago
While this is an interesting idea and I personally would welcome such regulation it probably wouldn't solve the problem the EU is trying to address. Android allows the installation of alternative app stores but Google still retains large effective control over the app market. I would argue that the EU recognised that and therefore regulated Operating systems and app stores because the former one isn't enough apparently. If things continue along this trajectory we may see the utility argument at the store level and at the OS level. Looking at how the electric power distribution industry is regulated it already works like this (at least here in Germany). On the one hand grid operators are heavily regulated (as you say) and must allow companies without infrastructure to resell power to end customers. On the other hand the actual owner of the last mile infrastructure is also forced to do business with all customers and has very little freedom to refuse(e.g. non-payment is a temporary valid reason). We may very well see something similar in the software distribution market since it's becoming such an integral part of life.

by 015a 3y ago

ncruces 3y ago

The EU did not compel Apple to have a comercial relationship with Epic. It is Apple who decided that third-party software distributers must comply with certain restrictions, and must sign a contract with them. And it was Apple which tried to prevent Epic from signing that contract, and who's now backtracking… before it's forced to do so by the EU.

arlcode 3y ago

While this is an interesting idea and I personally would welcome such regulation it probably wouldn't solve the problem the EU is trying to address. Android allows the installation of alternative app stores but Google still retains large effective control over the app market. I would argue that the EU recognised that and therefore regulated Operating systems and app stores because the former one isn't enough apparently. If things continue along this trajectory we may see the utility argument at the store level and at the OS level. Looking at how the electric power distribution industry is regulated it already works like this (at least here in Germany). On the one hand grid operators are heavily regulated (as you say) and must allow companies without infrastructure to resell power to end customers. On the other hand the actual owner of the last mile infrastructure is also forced to do business with all customers and has very little freedom to refuse(e.g. non-payment is a temporary valid reason). We may very well see something similar in the software distribution market since it's becoming such an integral part of life.