4 ms·
By that token no company is forced to anything. For instance if the EU or the DOJ were to require Apple to change their policies, we could say Apple isn't forc
by makeitdouble 2y ago
By that token no company is forced to anything.
For instance if the EU or the DOJ were to require Apple to change their policies, we could say Apple isn't forced to do so, as they still can refuse and "just" pay enormous fines until bankruptcy.
I'm not sure what we would call "force" if we take that definition.
- slowmovintarget 2y agoForce of law is different than fees in a walled garden. Fines are not the same as fees. Every player that does commerce on Apple's infrastructure pays fees to do so. Fines are punishment.
- makeitdouble 2y agoWhile fines should be different, but in practice that line is either blurry or non existent depending on the circumstances. For instance if Apple had to pay a global total of 2 millions of fine every year for their AppStore policy, it would be rolled in as cost of doing business and they'd keep ignoring the rulings for decades. If Amazon only had minor punishment for breaking AppSore rules they'd do it yesterday. A binding contract is only as strong as its penalties, and in that regard we can see laws a form of contract and vice versa.
- slowmovintarget 2y agoA fee is paid as an exchange of value by prior agreement. That is, you agree up front to pay the platform fees in exchange for use of the platform or specific features of it. Fines are not an exchange of value, even if some firms attempt to treat them that way. They are also not subject to agreement. They are risk and can be arbitrary. So no. They are not the same.