Dutch Watchdog Fines Apple $5.7 Million For a Third Time in App Store Dispute (reuters.com) 39
The Dutch antitrust watchdog has fined Apple 5 million euros ($5.72 million) for a third time for failing to allow software application makers in the Netherlands to use non-Apple payment methods for dating apps listed in the company's App Store. From a report: The Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) has been levying weekly fines of 5 million euros on Apple since the company missed a Jan. 15 deadline to make changes ordered by the watchdog. Apple, which could not immediately be reached for comment, has twice published information on its own blog about changes it is making to comply with the Dutch order. However, the ACM said on Monday it was not receiving enough information from the U.S. company to assess whether Apple was actually complying. "ACM is disappointed in Apple's behaviour and actions," it said in a statement. It noted that Dutch courts have upheld its decision, which found that Apple's behaviour violated competition law. Further reading: Going Dutch.
That probably suits them just fine (Score:1)
$5.7M / week to keep their monopoly is a bargain.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
i think you're confused on the definition of monopoly, but let the courts settle that.
Re: That probably suits them just fine (Score:2)
I don't like the overuse of the word monopoly either but regardless this is awful behavior by Apple. 30% of in-app purchases in 3rd party apps goes to Apple, and no alternative payment processors allowed? Market rate for payment processing is like 2%.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Market rate for app store percentages is %30. The only thing unique about Apple is the haters.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is unique in fully gating users into the App Store. Google does not restrict third party installation. Microsoft when it was developing a mobile OS allowed the same. Blackberry did as well.
Re: (Score:3)
There are plenty of other platforms that restrict third party installation. And users are fully allowed to use those platforms.
Re: (Score:2)
i think you're confused on the definition of monopoly, but let the courts settle that.
Not sure what you're suggesting, other than perhaps a name that might actually get the attention of anti-monopoly regulators.
Data Dominatrix. Tech Terminator. Whatever works, because "monopoly" sure as hell isn't a word worth a shit anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Time to up the fine.
Seems like the current fine is not effective.
Re: (Score:2)
[Tim Cook rummages around in the executive break room couch for loose change]
"Found this weeks $5.7MM!!!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The fine is capped at 50 million Euros, so it's actually a fairly reasonable assumption that Apple will never comply, given that they've already paid roughly a third of the maximum fine. Sure, they've made some token concessions, but those are just PR cover so that they can at least claim they are trying to comply with the law, even though they have no intent of ever complying with the spirit of the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually this is just a cap of the current provision. If Apple ignores the court order this will likely be raised. There is a precedent of IBM ignoring a Dutch court order that was then increased by 100 times after which IBM complied.
Re: That probably suits them just fine (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps not to only keep it in the Netherlands, however. — They are only required to offer it to Dutch people.
The Dutch state receiving 5 million euros per week is also not entirely insignificant.
Re: (Score:2)
$5.7M / week to keep their monopoly is a bargain.
Oh, their "monopoly", here's what's changing when they're fully compliant.
Given: $10/mo Dutch dating app IAP
Before, 30% commission, payment processing done by Apple
Keep $7, $3 to Apple
After, 27% commission, payment processing done off platform
Keep $7, $2.70 to Apple, (3%) $0.30 to external payment processor
With a cheaper processor, maybe you get to pocket (2%) $7.10, (1%) $7.20, (0%) $7.30 even. For dating apps. In the Netherlands.
Classic case of Apples and Oranges.... (Score:5, Funny)
Biblical proportions of a fruity tale: Apple vs. Oranges. Oranges are taking control of the garden.
Re: (Score:2)
Some mod didn't get the joke.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because knowing other countries and world history is unfortunately quite low.
I admit that in my case it was the historical interest, not current country knowledge that let me get the reference and I had to think about the fact that it is still a thing.
Why just "dating apps"? (Score:2)
I don't remember if somebody answered when we had this discussion previously, but what's so special about "dating apps" in the Netherlands? I'd expect the "antitrust watchdog" to either complain about all apps Apple's policy applies to, or not complain at all.
Re:Why just "dating apps"? (Score:4, Informative)
but what's so special about "dating apps" in the Netherlands?
Standing. They are the ones which complained. When the ACM started investigating they found their investigation was also duplicating scope of the EC's investigation into several other sectors including online streaming and marketplaces. But apparently the EC's investigation didn't cover dating apps so the ACM continued with a reduced scope.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
GREETINGS apple employee!
I'm not an Apple employee, but I'm not an idiot either. Why don't you go build such a platform and let millions of developers and billions of users use it for free and then report back on how well that works out for you.
Moron.
Well you have to be one of those?
Or did you forget that
1) Apple charges you for hardware, which should cover the cost of me downloading a few apps, many of which I have paid for
2) They can easily allow 3rd party storefronts and reduce their costs
Re: (Score:2)
This. Some bozo in another thread claimed he could duplicate most of Apple's global platform for less than $100 a year using a Cloudflare account. Just goes to show most people on here have no clue.
Re: (Score:3)
The App Store reportedly had $85.1B in revenue. Apple keeps 30%, so they kept about $15B. Are you seriously trying to claim it costs anywhere near $15B/year to run the App Store? Apple must be the most inefficient company ever.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure it costs them a lot less to operate. But companies exist to earn what we call profits. If they weren't making a profit they wouldn't be around for very long.
Re: (Score:1)
The thing you gave a 'this' to is a claim that they charge the commission to 'cover costs'. You can bet the costs are much closer to that guy's $100/year than the $15B/year they are collecting. They collect it for profit, period.
Re: (Score:3)
If you think that, clearly you don't know much about running a business and developing a global content delivery platform, customer service and payment processing apparatus, maintaining developer tools and APIs, internal training and documentation, product R&D, marketing, employee salaries and benefits to run and maintain infrastructure and support services, etc. And yes, get some profit. Pro tip, all companies exist to make a profit.
Insignificant (Score:1)