Apple May Face EU Rules To Open Up Payment Technology (bloomberg.com) 34
The European Union is weighing legislation that could force Apple to open iPhone payment technology to competitors. From a report: The potential rules would grant other payment services a right of access to infrastructure such as near-field communication technology embedded in smartphones, the European Commission said Thursday. While the EU didn't explicitly name Apple, it said the "most commonly reported issue" related to mobile device manufacturers restricting third-party access to NFC chips. The components handle wireless signals that allow users to pay via their smartphones or watches at store terminals. At present, iPhone and Apple Watch users can only make NFC payments using Apple Pay. Banks and other competitors have said they want the same functionality for their own iPhone apps but that Apple refuses access to the chip. By contrast, Google's Android phone allows rival apps to use NFC technology. Only one application is allowed access to it at a time for a given transaction to keep data secure.
Would that also mean...? (Score:5, Interesting)
Would every electronic payment mechanism be forced to allow Apple Pay then? If Apple has to open theirs up, so does everyone else, right? Or does the EU routinely pretend double-standards are the same as openness?
Re: (Score:2)
No. Contact-less payments can't refuse Apple Pay. But some credit card terminals do not allow contact-less payments, and are chip+pin only. Apple Pay won't work on these.
Nothing wrong with that, no double-standard.
Re: (Score:2)
For the record, I think it would be smart for Apple to open up their NFC chip to other usages. If people start relying on the NFC for more things, that limits the other phone choices they can make. They'd need to get a phone that has the app and compatible NFC technology.
Hopefully that would also lead to a lot more NFC-based authentication mechanisms for getting in locked doors and for various ticket systems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No. Contact-less payments can't refuse Apple Pay. But some credit card terminals do not allow contact-less payments, and are chip+pin only. Apple Pay won't work on these. Nothing wrong with that, no double-standard.
I wish that was ANYWHERE near true! Just the other day, the vendor had a brand-new contact-less payments terminal branded "Now supports Apple Pay, Google Pay, Samsung Pay" (yada, yada). Guess which payment method did NOT work? That's right, Apple Pay!
The commenter didn't make up this double-standard argument -- it's the reality around the world! (I've had this experience in North America, Europe, and Asia all in the past 12 months!)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Why should retailers be allowed to choose if Apple isn't allowed to choose?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you honestly confused by this or are you just trolling?
Re: (Score:2)
Again, I literally don't care what Apple does, other than it has the potential to set precedent. Today it's Apple saying you can only use their service, next it's Samsung, then it's the next guy. It's anti-competitive and shouldn't be allowed to propagate. You don't have to go too far down the slippery slope to see where Microsoft wouldn't allow you to install Chrome on Windows.
As far requiring merchants to accept it, now you are forcing a company to pay for something that they may not want to pay for.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm against double standards. So if no one can choose, that's a standard. If everyone can choose, that's a standard. If some can choose and others can't, that’s a double-standard and I'm opposed.
We will see how it works out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As I wrote in another post, there is no 'double standard' in play here. It is obvious that different types of relationships have different sets of rules. For instance, is it perfectly natural (and legal) for a customer to discuss how much something should cost with a supplier. But two competitors having that discussion is illegal. That is not a double standard.
Certainly a retailer can decide what products and services he offers (including methods of payment). That can't really be disputed. If the cust
Re: (Score:2)
There is no double standard where you are imagining one. There are several important differences.
A merchant who refuses Apple Pay is not a competitor to Apple Pay, whereas any other payment service on an iPhone would be a competitor to Apple Pay. That right there changes the rules completely.
There are more than a billion iPhone users. A substantial number of them want to use contactless payments. A merchant refusing Apple Pay does so at considerable risk to himself - those people may just go somewhere
Re: (Score:2)
There is a difference here. If someone like Ingenico (who makes card payment machines) refused to allow Apple Pay on their terminals (despite the users of these terminals wanting Apple Pay) it would be the same as what Apple is doing.
Whereas a consumer (or merchant) is free to choose what payment methods they will pay with or what payment methods they will accept as payment and no-one should be forcing someone to accept a particular payment method (whether that be Apple Pay, American Express, Bitcoin or oth
Re: (Score:2)
Why are everyone else first class citizens who get to choose and device-makers second class citizens who have to accept others' choices?
Merchants don't have to use Ingenico terminals if they don't support something. Consumers don't have to use an Apple phone.
If the EU wants to standardize everything and every device and merchant and bank and processor must work with everyone who meets the standard, that seems fair. Giving choices to some and mandates to others doesn't seem fair.
Re: (Score:2)
Because of power dynamics involved. Laws are specifically crafted to protect the weaker party. You can find similar laws in things like renting for example, where there are far harsher legal limitations and requirements for landlords than for tenants.
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, calculated and intentional injustice.
Standards should be for standardization, not to fuck over the guy the local government warlords don't like.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds more like a bug, especially since Apple pay was being advertised.
I don't use Apple Pay, but I've never encountered a contact-less terminal supporting credit cards (visa/mastercard) but not the same credit card through Google Pay.
Re: (Score:2)
Would every electronic payment mechanism be forced to allow Apple Pay then?
I've never come across a payment terminal in the EU which couldn't be used with Apple Pay. Is that kind of shit a thing in the USA?
Re: (Score:2)
No because Apple Pay is already widely accepted and popular. They only care when the market isn't delivering choices to customers. On iPhone the only choice is Apple Pay, everyone else is banned from using NFC and banned from using the secure credential storage.
I would certainly hope Apple paying the EU (Score:3)
taxes on the 30% Apple is collecting.
Re: (Score:2)
It's only 1-2% on that, or less. Apple Pay is just a glorified credit card after all.
The EU is basically saying Apple needs to open the NFC circuits for other apps (it only works with Apple Pay). This might be fun, since NFC usage for that requires access to the secure enclave. I wonder how Apple will manage.
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't about app store payment processing. Try understanding what is being talked about. But I guess that would require you to RTFS which is too much of a tall order.
Let's hope . . . (Score:1)
One thing Apple did majorly right is divorcing all front/back flow of information that vendors, credit card companies and banks use for 'analytics'.
I'm not saying no security is what we want if we can't have complete security, but encryption that's reversible or relies on parties to be 'trusted' is dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
encryption that's reversible or relies on parties to be 'trusted' is dumb.
I'm really interested in hearing you explain what encryption is for and how it is used.
Apple will comply like they did with USB (Score:2)
NFC Fragmentation, here we come! (Score:2)
Apple's NFC Payment tech is a trusted-only (closed) by design. Their OS is the steward of the NFC hardware, mostly because the Payments
Re: (Score:2)
This is long since done in EU with SEPA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Today, even banks themselves are legally required to open up their systems for third party payment systems, even when they are in direct competition with bank's own payment offerings.
Wrong things (Score:2)
They need to work on Apple opening up iMessages and media/music library portability instead (or at least too). The reason is those two things keep people locked into Apple even if a competing messaging app or music player is superior. It stifles progress when anything other than product features compel people to stay on a platform. Think about it .. if everyone was forced to drive a Tesla simply because the roads won't accomodate any other brand .. that would prevent anyone from developing a better vehicle
Re: (Score:2)
Devil in the Details (Score:1)
Would removing the 3rd party support for NFC they've had for years(which explicitly doesn't allow the Application IDs for payments) be enough to skirt the law? (e.g. drop NFC support for the EU to comply).
Would allowing credit card issuers to create lighting NFC dongles be compliant?
Would new phones be required to have NFC?(most Oppo Android phones don't have NFC)
Would
Do they mean this api? (Score:1)