8 ms·

EU says Apple has serious issues for not complying with DMA

56 points by laktak 2y ago

malermeister 2y ago
I hope they make an example out of them. One can't even call their behavior "malicious compliance", "malicious noncompliance" is more fitting.
stavros 2y ago
I've been boycotting Apple for years for its a consumer-hostile stance, and it makes me feel very conflicted that the EU is forcing Apple to make changes that make the iPhone a very compelling alternative to Android.
- wordofx 2y ago
  So you must boycot android too. What do you use for a phone?
  - stavros 2y ago
    I can unlock the bootloader on Android.
    - wordofx 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - stavros 2y ago
        Alright, that's enough conversation for me.
      - eqvinox 2y ago
        > The only people who whine about iPhones being locked down are people who can’t afford one to begin with. This statement is so out there, I don't even need to write an actual comment.
        stavros 2y ago
        I just flagged it and moved on.
      - fuomag9 2y ago
        I can afford it, I bought a 15 pro at launch (here in the EU the price is even higher than in the USA) and I am still complaining What now?
        hagbard_c 2y ago
        > What now? Don't fall for the trap of defending your ability to overspend on an iDevice, it only serves to stroke the parent poster's weak ego. Just buy whatever phone you want, overpriced or not.
- iLoveOncall 2y ago
  That doesn't make them less inherently customer-hostile though.
  - stavros 2y ago
    Yeah, that's why I'm conflicted. They won't be less customer-hostile, but at least they'll be forced to let me do more things with the device I bought.
mdhb 2y ago
If ever there was a company who was actually a good candidate for the 10% of global revenue fines the EU have talked about in the past it would have to be Apple. They have gone out of their way time after time after time to be as hostile as possible to any kind of oversight or compliance that was required of them. I actually think this is no shit the ideal case study to finally use those powers.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  As someone who disdains both Apple and EU, this is in a way a fun experiment to watch regarding whether corporate entities can actually overpower sovereign entities. It's a setting oft seen in cyberpunk, but so far it has been more fiction than real.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - consumer451 2y ago
    > but so far it has been more fiction than real. Is it though? We have a system with extremely powerful multi-national companies, and yet conveniently for them, no real system for multi-national regulations. Even just domestically, auto manufactures have a lot of sway in Germany. Energy, telecom, and chemical giants seem to write their own regulations in the USA.
can16358p 2y ago
First they forced to change their own devices' charging ports, now they are forcing to make changes to their own platform again on their own devices. What's next? Just force Tim Cook to sell the company to EU legislators? I'm not a fan of Apple as a company but this is getting beyond ridiculous. A government or a similar body should not have a right over a company's own products' design and how things work, anyone can pick between buying an iPhone or not buying an iPhone if they prefer not to. It should be people's choice, not EU's.
- vincnetas 2y ago
  Just a counter example. There is a huge list of things that you MUST have in a car to be able to sell it. So this is not something unthinkable and new that is happening to phones.
  - iLoveOncall 2y ago
    I guarantee you OP doesn't wear his seatbelt.
    - can16358p 2y ago
      Well I do wear my seatbelt. However, I do it for my own safety, not because I'm forced to do.
      - Doxin 2y ago
        And similarly these EU laws don't force end users into anything. They just force Apple to provide a minimum set of features as required by law.
      - tossandthrow 2y ago
        But what if the car manufacturer insisted on not selling you a car with a seat belt?
        can16358p 2y ago
oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]
makeitdouble 2y ago
On one hand it was obvious, Apple surely did see it coming and decided to play the dumb strategy instead, so I'm so glad the EU didn't just give up. That would have been an horrible precedent from all perspective. And this is opening the way to the other legislation to pass reasonably close requirements (e.g. Japan) without undue burden on Apple. On the other hand, I understand the process isn't supposed to be fast, but as a consumer it looks like it takes so much time. At least the regulators are willing to hint at where the discussion will be going instead of keeping it secret for a year just for an effect of surprise. If the dust settles in three years, I get the feeling the market will have half moved on to the next big thing and Apple will already have ripped most of their transgressions' benefits. On the third hand, I can't deny some amount of schadenfreude looking at Apple having to deal with the same "do the work first, we'll judge if it meets our review standard afterwards" treatment as they do to developers. PS: the weirdest part to me is, looking at this year's WWDC lack of bigger features, it's obvious Apple had to use significant resource to deal with the EU requirements, the APIs for alternate browsers for instance didn't come by magic. And obviously the replacement of the default apps on the lock screen is also in line with the DMA. Why then play it dumb when it costs them so much to do needless back and forths.
- aeurielesn 2y ago
  I think the trick was to try to postpone it indefinitely so that the next CEO and board has to deal with it and not the current. Of course, after cashing out.
- mesebrec 2y ago
  > On the third hand, I can't deny some amount of schadenfreude looking at Apple having to deal with the same "do the work first, we'll judge if it meets our review standard afterwards" treatment as they do to developers. That's not really how the process was supposed to work. Apple has had a lot of discussions with the EC over the past year about this law and its implementation. This is common and the goal is to help the company figure out how to implement it. However, from the EU side, it seemed as if Apple completely misunderstood what the discussions with the EU were for. Apple was mainly focused on trying to lobby against all restrictions, not realizing the EU already made up their mind. The EU was trying to prepare Apple, but instead Apple dragged their feet, remained in denial, and were then suddenly surprised that yes, indeed, they really can't lobby their way out of compliance.
ChrisArchitect 2y ago
[dupe] Actual article: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/18/apple-issues-very-serious-under-landmark-eu-rules-vestager.html https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/18/apple-issues-very-serious-un... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40725545 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40725545) And some more recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40681920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40681920

56 points by laktak 2y ago

I hope they make an example out of them. One can't even call their behavior "malicious compliance", "malicious noncompliance" is more fitting.

stavros 2y ago

I've been boycotting Apple for years for its a consumer-hostile stance, and it makes me feel very conflicted that the EU is forcing Apple to make changes that make the iPhone a very compelling alternative to Android.

wordofx 2y ago
So you must boycot android too. What do you use for a phone?
- stavros 2y ago
  I can unlock the bootloader on Android.
  - wordofx 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - stavros 2y ago
      Alright, that's enough conversation for me.
    - eqvinox 2y ago
      > The only people who whine about iPhones being locked down are people who can’t afford one to begin with. This statement is so out there, I don't even need to write an actual comment.
      - stavros 2y ago
        I just flagged it and moved on.
    - fuomag9 2y ago
      I can afford it, I bought a 15 pro at launch (here in the EU the price is even higher than in the USA) and I am still complaining What now?
      - hagbard_c 2y ago
        > What now? Don't fall for the trap of defending your ability to overspend on an iDevice, it only serves to stroke the parent poster's weak ego. Just buy whatever phone you want, overpriced or not.
iLoveOncall 2y ago
That doesn't make them less inherently customer-hostile though.
- stavros 2y ago
  Yeah, that's why I'm conflicted. They won't be less customer-hostile, but at least they'll be forced to let me do more things with the device I bought.

mdhb 2y ago

If ever there was a company who was actually a good candidate for the 10% of global revenue fines the EU have talked about in the past it would have to be Apple. They have gone out of their way time after time after time to be as hostile as possible to any kind of oversight or compliance that was required of them. I actually think this is no shit the ideal case study to finally use those powers.

Dalewyn 2y ago
As someone who disdains both Apple and EU, this is in a way a fun experiment to watch regarding whether corporate entities can actually overpower sovereign entities. It's a setting oft seen in cyberpunk, but so far it has been more fiction than real.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- consumer451 2y ago
  > but so far it has been more fiction than real. Is it though? We have a system with extremely powerful multi-national companies, and yet conveniently for them, no real system for multi-national regulations. Even just domestically, auto manufactures have a lot of sway in Germany. Energy, telecom, and chemical giants seem to write their own regulations in the USA.

can16358p 2y ago

First they forced to change their own devices' charging ports, now they are forcing to make changes to their own platform again on their own devices. What's next? Just force Tim Cook to sell the company to EU legislators? I'm not a fan of Apple as a company but this is getting beyond ridiculous. A government or a similar body should not have a right over a company's own products' design and how things work, anyone can pick between buying an iPhone or not buying an iPhone if they prefer not to. It should be people's choice, not EU's.

vincnetas 2y ago
Just a counter example. There is a huge list of things that you MUST have in a car to be able to sell it. So this is not something unthinkable and new that is happening to phones.
- iLoveOncall 2y ago
  I guarantee you OP doesn't wear his seatbelt.
  - can16358p 2y ago
    Well I do wear my seatbelt. However, I do it for my own safety, not because I'm forced to do.
    - Doxin 2y ago
      And similarly these EU laws don't force end users into anything. They just force Apple to provide a minimum set of features as required by law.
    - tossandthrow 2y ago
      But what if the car manufacturer insisted on not selling you a car with a seat belt?
      - can16358p 2y ago

oldpersonintx 2y ago

[dead]

makeitdouble 2y ago

On one hand it was obvious, Apple surely did see it coming and decided to play the dumb strategy instead, so I'm so glad the EU didn't just give up. That would have been an horrible precedent from all perspective. And this is opening the way to the other legislation to pass reasonably close requirements (e.g. Japan) without undue burden on Apple. On the other hand, I understand the process isn't supposed to be fast, but as a consumer it looks like it takes so much time. At least the regulators are willing to hint at where the discussion will be going instead of keeping it secret for a year just for an effect of surprise. If the dust settles in three years, I get the feeling the market will have half moved on to the next big thing and Apple will already have ripped most of their transgressions' benefits. On the third hand, I can't deny some amount of schadenfreude looking at Apple having to deal with the same "do the work first, we'll judge if it meets our review standard afterwards" treatment as they do to developers. PS: the weirdest part to me is, looking at this year's WWDC lack of bigger features, it's obvious Apple had to use significant resource to deal with the EU requirements, the APIs for alternate browsers for instance didn't come by magic. And obviously the replacement of the default apps on the lock screen is also in line with the DMA. Why then play it dumb when it costs them so much to do needless back and forths.

aeurielesn 2y ago
I think the trick was to try to postpone it indefinitely so that the next CEO and board has to deal with it and not the current. Of course, after cashing out.
mesebrec 2y ago
> On the third hand, I can't deny some amount of schadenfreude looking at Apple having to deal with the same "do the work first, we'll judge if it meets our review standard afterwards" treatment as they do to developers. That's not really how the process was supposed to work. Apple has had a lot of discussions with the EC over the past year about this law and its implementation. This is common and the goal is to help the company figure out how to implement it. However, from the EU side, it seemed as if Apple completely misunderstood what the discussions with the EU were for. Apple was mainly focused on trying to lobby against all restrictions, not realizing the EU already made up their mind. The EU was trying to prepare Apple, but instead Apple dragged their feet, remained in denial, and were then suddenly surprised that yes, indeed, they really can't lobby their way out of compliance.

ChrisArchitect 2y ago

[dupe] Actual article: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/18/apple-issues-very-serious-under-landmark-eu-rules-vestager.html https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/18/apple-issues-very-serious-un... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40725545 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40725545) And some more recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40681920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40681920