Apple Hit With Sixth Antitrust Fine Over Dutch Dating Apps Payments

Apple still hasn't complied with a Dutch antitrust order to allow local dating apps to have the option to use third party payment tech to sell digital content to their app users. From a report: In a statement today, the Dutch Authority for Consumers & Market (ACM) said it has levied a sixth fine against the tech giant for non-compliance with an order first issued last year. The iPhone maker is now facing a $33.6 million penalty over the issue, with the prospect of further $5.6 million increases in the coming weeks if it continues to stonewall the regulator (up to a $56 million maximum).

$56 million max?

[SirSpanksALot]

Apple is just going to pay the max fine, and be done with it. Only way you'd force them to change it would be to keep fining them in perpetuity at a level large enough that they're losing money.

Re:

[saloomy]

The fine would have to be so massive that it would break the entire Dutch App Store. If I were Apple at that point, I would just decline all App Store functions in the Netherlands, and watch the dutch people cry uncle. The App Store is not expensive. People pay for Apps and content all the time, and developers produce oodles of it. There is no market imbalance that requires regulation here.

Re:

[SirSpanksALot]

I don't know that I totally agree with that... At the very least they should allow alternative app stores - Then again, there's a reason I don't buy apple's stuff.

Re:

[franzrogar]

I must simply laugh to your reply. It's so wrong in all aspects that I don't know which one to pick... So, I've selected two of them:

1) Quote: "There is no market imbalance that requires regulation here."

FALSE (with required capitals). If you buy a washing mashing and it only allows you to use its washing cleaning products IS an imbalance.

If you sell phones and it only allows you to use your own payment through, that, my friend, IS an imbalance.

2) Quote: "The App Store is not expensive."

Because you say so

Re:

[msauve]

>FALSE (with required capitals). If you buy a washing mashing and it only allows you to use its washing cleaning products IS an imbalance.

You say that as if there aren't lots of other washing machine manufacturers, which don't impose such restrictions.

Re: $56 million max?

[xavdeman]

The washing machine vendor imposing such a restriction would not have a 'dominant position' (e.g. a duopoly with Google Play) and would have to be extremely clearly marked in all promotional materials: "Warning: only accepts detergent from brand Y".

Re:

[msauve]

Uh, what? You do know that Android allows installing apps from places other than Google Play, don't you?

Re:

[franzrogar]

I stopped reading your reply in the first sentence when I red "nanotechnology".

I was talking about laundry detergent...

Paying to get a date?

[Catvid-22]

Actually Apple shouldn't pay in this case. If you pay to get a date, you have a Problem.

Fines too small.

[Gravis Zero]

Until the fine outweighs the profit, they would prefer to be fined meager sums indefinitely. I certainly hope the fines increase exponentially because if they don't then the Dutch cannot win.

Re: Fines too small.

[DontSweatTheDetails]

Hopefully other countries will see the cash cow and start milking too... It's possibly the closest we will get to Apple paying a fair share of taxes

Re: Fines too small.

[Frobnicator]

Yup. As was mentioned each previous week, the maximum fine isn't even in the rounding error of their profits, let alone their revenue. It is a minor annoyance to pay, while protecting their monopoly on the 30% cut from every transaction.

Re:

[fermion]

To put this in perspective, it is like fining an average American a few dollars a week. The max fine is what someone might pay for a night of drinks. The Dutch are just trying to look tough, or perhaps they have budget crisis, like a small town setting up a speed trap.

Re:

[sound+vision]

Speed trap isn't a great analogy, there's a heavy connotation there of deception and shadiness. Certainly in my local area, intersections that installed red-light cameras often had their yellow-light time cut below the 2.9-second state minimum. Thus violating state law, causing wrecks, and probably a few deaths.

Regardless of the Dutch's motivation here, the effects of their fines track closely with their stated goals and the common good: Promoting competition to foster a free market, and having large corpo

Meanwhile...

[sconeu]

Tim Cook rummages around in the Apple Executive Lounge sofa cushions...

"Here, this should cover those pesky fines".

Disallow dating apps

[registrations_suck]

Would be great if apple just updated its policy to disallow dating apps.

Re:

[tlhIngan]

Would be great if apple just updated its policy to disallow dating apps.

I suspect this might be the case soon enough. The Dutch regulator refuses to accept what Apple has proposed - they want "one universal app" not "One Dutch-specific app". Yet the ruling only applies in the Netherlands.

So either Apple excludes dating apps in the Netherlands, forcing them to be webapps (which they already are, anyways) or non-Netherlands based dating apps will cry foul over the special treatment.

Of course, both sides are b

Why bother making a dating app?

[esev]

Technically speaking, what is in the dating app that requires it to be an app? What prevents these sites from creating a mobile-optimized website and not contributing to Apple's store at all?

Who has jurisdiction?

[mkwan]

To me (an Australian) it seems weird that a regulatory authority can decide guilt and issue a fine. Is the next step for Apple to fight the fines in court, or is the regulator the final authority?

Apple should ban the apps in Denmark

[RogueWarrior65]

How much would Apple really lose if they did that? More than they would by paying fines?

Dutch ruling

[gnasher719]

I assume that Apple disagrees strongly with the Dutch ruling. Will these companies help apple. financing all the free apps?