Apple Gets EU Warning To Stop Geo-Blocking on App, iTunes Stores (yahoo.com) 69
Apple was notified by the European Union that its geo-blocking practices are potentially in breach of consumer protection rules, adding to the iPhone maker's regulatory issues in the bloc. From a report: Apple's App Store, iTunes Store and other media services unlawfully discriminate against European customers based on their place of residence, according to a European Commission statement on Tuesday.
The notification comes as Apple is facing the first-ever fine under the Digital Markets Act, or DMA, for failing to allow app developers to steer users to cheaper deals, Bloomberg News reported last week. That penalty is set to come months after the Cupertino, California-based company was hit with a $1.9 billion fine for similar abuses under the bloc's traditional competition rules.
The geo-locating investigation was conducted together with a network of national consumer authorities and found Apple media services only allow users to use payment cards issued in the countries they registered their Apple accounts, according to the statement. The App Store also blocks users from downloading apps offered in other countries, the investigation found.
The notification comes as Apple is facing the first-ever fine under the Digital Markets Act, or DMA, for failing to allow app developers to steer users to cheaper deals, Bloomberg News reported last week. That penalty is set to come months after the Cupertino, California-based company was hit with a $1.9 billion fine for similar abuses under the bloc's traditional competition rules.
The geo-locating investigation was conducted together with a network of national consumer authorities and found Apple media services only allow users to use payment cards issued in the countries they registered their Apple accounts, according to the statement. The App Store also blocks users from downloading apps offered in other countries, the investigation found.
They want global control of Apple? (Score:3)
I'm not sure I read this right.
Are they upset because they passed some laws in EU which Apple was violating so Apple made their devices not violate the laws in those countries and now they're upset that their users are blocked from activities that would have Apple violating the laws?
That's how the summary looked. Can someone explain?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Which is, yes, unreasonable. When a totalitarian regime wants its rules (which tend to lean heavily into political censorship) to be enforced globally, we laugh in their faces because, haha, no. The EU's rules are more well-intentioned, but it remains true that ex
Re:They want global control of Apple? (Score:4, Informative)
I'm sure that if Apple wasn't doing business in the EU that the laws wouldn't apply. But they *do* apply within the EU.
Re: (Score:3)
How are you able to write complete sentences and yet unable to read them? Apple follows EU laws in EU countries
Quick to criticise slow to understand. The point the parent was making (and that the EU is making) is that Apple isn't following EU laws in EU countries. Try and read the complaint before commenting again.
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus Christ are you dense. This has NOTHING to do with anything globally. The EU is a collection of countries governed by rules. The complaint is between EU laws, EU citizens living in different EU countries, e.g. someone with a German Apple account and a Dutch bank account. The rest of the world isn't involved in the slightest.
The EU has changed and retroactively applied rules specifically for Google and Apple.
These laws have been on the books unchanged since inception nearly a decade ago. They weren't even targeted at Google or Apple, but rather Netflix's and the MAFIAA geoblocking conte
Re: (Score:1)
> is that Apple isn't following EU laws in EU countries.
Wait, what?
I thought the issue was that they were using GeoIP or some equivalent to check whether a connecting device is in the EU or not, so that they could comply with the EU laws *in* the EU, without also having to follow them everywhere else. Which the EU doesn't like, because they want their citizens to be protected by EU law even when they travel outside the EU. (But that's not
Re: (Score:2)
And all this will achieve is that the digital market for EUs poorer countries will be priced out, because Apple, Netflix et al aren't going to drop pricing across the board to the currently lowest available in the EU, they are going to price for the biggest markets.
Re: (Score:2)
You could be right. Or possibly local suppliers will develop. They may have different songs, etc., but that's not necessarily bad.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's more that they want their customer-protection laws (like, the ones that require allowing direct competitors into your app store, even if they don't give you as much of a cut as you want of all their revenues) to be enforced globally.
I don't think that's the issue at all. Rather, when a European buys an iPhone, bought in Europe, sold by Apple in Europe, that European should maintain all the rights prescribed by EU law, regardless of whether that person, for example, travels to the United States and stays there for a year on an extended tourist or work visa. Apple shouldn't gain the rights to turn that EU phone into a less capable American phone merely because it is now physically located in another country. Technically speaking, if a
Re: (Score:1)
Ok, so what should Apple do if another country says, "all phones operating inside our borders must follow,our laws no matter where the phone originated" and those laws conflict with EU laws?
This global enforcement of local laws seems unworkable.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, so what should Apple do if another country says, "all phones operating inside our borders must follow,our laws no matter where the phone originated" and those laws conflict with EU laws?
This global enforcement of local laws seems unworkable.
Then it becomes illegal to bring a non-compliant device into that country. Complying with local laws is the responsibility of the importer, not the manufacturer.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, so what should Apple do if another country says, "all phones operating inside our borders must follow,our laws no matter where the phone originated" and those laws conflict with EU laws?
This global enforcement of local laws seems unworkable.
Precisely.
And that's the least of it!
Re: (Score:3)
when a European buys an iPhone, bought in Europe, sold by Apple in Europe, that European should maintain all the rights prescribed by EU law, regardless of whether that person, for example, travels to the United States and stays there for a year on an extended tourist or work visa.
So, when I travel to Europe, my right to bear arms should go with me? Because I can open carry my firearm in Texas, I can do so in France?
That's not remotely the same thing. Your right to bear arms isn't a condition imposed on firearm manufacturers. Rather, it is a condition imposed upon state and federal government agencies that precludes certain conditions from being imposed on firearm manufacturers, dealers, etc.
If there were a law that prohibited gun manufacturers from putting electronic trigger locks on their guns, and you brought a gun into Europe and the gun manufacturer remotely turned on the electronic trigger lock as soon as it cr
Re: (Score:1)
That's really neither here nor there. You're trying to make international law work differently depending on whether a given country's law, that is to be enforced, applies to an individual or a corporation. That's not how international law works.
Re: (Score:2)
> Your right to bear arms isn't a condition imposed on firearm manufacturers.
That's really neither here nor there. You're trying to make international law work differently depending on whether a given country's law, that is to be enforced, applies to an individual or a corporation. That's not how international law works.
You're fundamentally misrepresenting the right to bear arms, and that's why you're confused here.
The law absolutely DOES work differently depending on whether a law is binding upon individuals or upon the government.
Governments only have the right to compel companies to follow their laws when doing business within their respective countries. A government can bind a corporation doing business within its borders, compelling it to comply with that country's laws, requiring that products sold meet specific sta
Re: (Score:2)
when a European buys an iPhone, bought in Europe, sold by Apple in Europe, that European should maintain all the rights prescribed by EU law, regardless of whether that person, for example, travels to the United States and stays there for a year on an extended tourist or work visa.
So, when I travel to Europe, my right to bear arms should go with me? Because I can open carry my firearm in Texas, I can do so in France?
Perfect analogy!
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's more that they want their customer-protection laws (like, the ones that require allowing direct competitors into your app store, even if they don't give you as much of a cut as you want of all their revenues) to be enforced globally.
I don't think that's the issue at all. Rather, when a European buys an iPhone, bought in Europe, sold by Apple in Europe, that European should maintain all the rights prescribed by EU law, regardless of whether that person, for example, travels to the United States and stays there for a year on an extended tourist or work visa. Apple shouldn't gain the rights to turn that EU phone into a less capable American phone merely because it is now physically located in another country. Technically speaking, if an American buys an iPhone in Europe, that phone should also retain the rights granted by the sale of that phone in Europe, even if that American later returns to the U.S. permanently. The reason for this is that the EU consumer protection laws govern Apple's right to sell the device in Europe in the first place, and therefore should follow the device, no matter how many countries it passes through, no matter how many times it is resold, etc.
Of course, the reason Apple doesn't want to do this is because it will create a rather large market for grey-market iPhone imports from Europe, where people or companies buy an iPhone, register it in the EU, and then sell it to an American who wants out of the walled garden. So to the extent that this could occur, one could argue that this will effectively cause the EU's consumer protection laws to apply globally, but that's just a side effect. The core requirement is that their consumer protection laws should apply to all phones bought within the EU, regardless of the owner's travel plans or nationality, and that's not an unreasonable demand.
Yes it is. It is absolutely unreasonable. Voluntarily crossing Borders has consequences.
If the phone is here longer than say, six months. That way, tourists aren't surprised; and no Grey Market is created.
Otherwise, where (and when) does it end?
Simply put: The EU is not the Boss of the World.
BTW, a US-purchased iPhone that spends an equivalent time in the EU, should be able to start accessing EU Alternate App Stores, etc. Probably through an Update...
Re: (Score:1)
> that European should maintain all the rights prescribed by EU law, regardless of whether
> that person, for example, travels to the United States and stays there for a year on an
> extended tourist or work visa.
That sounds like enforcing EU laws in America, to me.
I'm not excited about some of Apple's app-store practices, and I can sympathize with the EU's desire to make them stop doing that, but it's not reasonab
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's more that they want their customer-protection laws (like, the ones that require allowing direct competitors into your app store, even if they don't give you as much of a cut as you want of all their revenues) to be enforced globally.
False. This complaint is about geoblocks between EU member countries only. None of this applies globally.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does business in the EU. If they stop that, consumer protection laws stop to apply. But as long as they sell things in the EU, they are subject to EU consumer protection laws.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
OK so I work for a company that provides a marketplace for vendors. We do not distribute the app in the EU because we have no vendors there. we have no network.
But if I build up a network of vendors in say, France then I might like to translate my app to French and start shipping the app there. But now I need to ship the app to Germany so they can open it up and see that there are no local vendors for them to use?
I get why they want this but some apps are actually tied to real world things that might only
Re:They want global control of Apple? (Score:4, Informative)
But if I build up a network of vendors in say, France then I might like to translate my app to French and start shipping the app there. But now I need to ship the app to Germany so they can open it up and see that there are no local vendors for them to use?
That is a misinterpretation. What this would mean, in that hypothetical case, is that you cannot block a German from buying the app on the French app store, or prevent them from buying things in the app with a CC issued by a German bank. You can, however, refuse to ship to addresses outside France, or charge more for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool but if Germany passes a law saying that apps provided there need to support German do I now need to translate my app so that a German can download it and not be able to use it? do I need to conform to other German specific laws for an app that can't even provide an actual service in Germany. Not everything is digital and not everything is just shipped via UPS. Think grub hub or door dash or instacart. Those only make sense where you have the infrastructure.
If Germany bans uber do they still need to
Re: (Score:2)
No. If Germany passed a national law that governed the German app store, that would only cover apps sold on the German app store. Since your app is sold on the French app store, it would not be covered, but you can't prevent the German guy from buying it.
Here is a good American analogy for what Apple is trying to get away with: imagine you are from Alabama and you go to a brewery in Georgia. The waiter cards you and refuses to sell you bier because your driver's license is from Alabama, even though the lic
Re: They want global control of Apple? (Score:5, Informative)
I think it is about blocking customers from other EU countries, rather than beyond the EU bloc. Netflix has run into this issue too.
The way it is now, is like if a Texas resident was only allowed to use a Texas based App Store, and not permitted to access a New York based one.
Apple would have to decide whether it makes an EU based App Store or allow any EU credit card in any of the other EU based App stores.
Re: (Score:3)
This exactly. The EU wants all customers in the Single Market to have access to the same deals.
This of course goes against how digital media are typically licensed - on a by country basis. But the law is clear, and a contract cannot break the law or stipulate that a law is broken.
Apple will have to give in eventually, but for now they are trying to profit from market differentials.
Re: (Score:1)
Indeed, before Brexit we Brits used to make use of that extensively to get better prices than were available on "treasure island". Used to get loads of stuff from eBay and Amazon, and even with the currency conversion and higher shipping costs they were still often much much cheaper.
Re: (Score:3)
The EU has jurisdiction--or at least can assert jurisdiction--over EU citizens, wherever they happen to reside. If Apple were to segregate users based on citizenship, rather than location, they would probably be OK.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that probably applies to purchases made within the EU no matter who the purchaser was. Yeah, the summary makes it sound like it's based on citizenship, but I suspect that's a mistake...or at least only a partial truth.
Re: (Score:2)
In the end, the EU gets to decide whether the rules are based on citizenship or by location of purchase, because they can say "If you want to do business in the EU, you have to honor our rules on our terms."
Re: (Score:2)
The prohibition of discrimination based on nationality is the very objective of the EU. It goes back to the Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community of 1957.
Article 7 -- Within the field of application of this Treaty and without prejudice to the special provisions mentioned therein, any discrimination on the grounds of nationality shall hereby be prohibited. -- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki... [wikisource.org]
(Currently TFEU article 18. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki... [wikisource.org] )
It also in the Charter of Fundamental rights, article 21
Article 21 - Non-discrimination -- 2. Within the scope of application of the Treaties and without prejudice to any of their specific provisions, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited. -- https://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-ch... [europa.eu]
It has been continuously enforced by the Court of Justice:
The prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality is the cornerstone of European integration: any citizen of the Union lawfully resident in a Member State of which he or she is not a national can rely on the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality in all situations which fall within the scope of EU law. Such discrimination may be direct in the sense that a difference in treatment is directly related to nationality, or indirect where the treatment depends, for example, on the country of residence. The matter has been brought before the Court on multiple occasions. -- Court of Justice of the European Union https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/j... [europa.eu]
Place of residence is considered derived from the discrimination of nationality. It is prohibited in regulations, and the EC also enforces against governments.
Related
Re: (Score:3)
Little more info here :
https://www.irishlegal.com/art... [irishlegal.com]
"According to the CPC Network’s assessment, a number of Apple Media Services unlawfully discriminate European consumers based on their place of residence.
Apple Media Services have a different interface for different countries in the EU/EEA. In the app version of these services, consumers are only allowed to access the interface made for the country where they have registered their Apple account and face significant challenges when attempting to c
Re: They want global control of Apple? (Score:2)
Put simply they should have a single EU app store that can have different interface language options that allows any EU bank to be used to make purchases, but treats all users the same no matter where they are in the EU.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure I read this right.
Are they upset because they passed some laws in EU which Apple was violating so Apple made their devices not violate the laws in those countries and now they're upset that their users are blocked from activities that would have Apple violating the laws?
That's how the summary looked. Can someone explain?
I fear neither of us has the years required to explain this to you.
Apple is using malicious compliance, trying to say they've complied with the letter of the law whilst simultaneously doing everything they can to violate the reasons behind it (the spirit of the law), basically putting in the system to try to punish EU users. The EU isn't going to lie down and take that shit and they're definately not stupid... I know it seems odd to have a government that actually works for the benefit of it's people, bu
Re: (Score:1)
Ok, so someone else here said this about traveling within EU countries which is not clear from the summary. If that's the case then ok I get that.
But if they mean outside the EU then I don't see how that can work. Simple case of conflicting national laws: EU says "XYZ law applies to all EU citizens globally". Then country LMNOP says "all phones operating in our borders must adhere to our laws" which conflict with EU laws. What is Apple or any other company supposed to do?
Normally, companies must comply
Re: (Score:2)
This is a core difference between US law and EU law. In the US it is compliance with the letter of the law which is enforced. In the EU, as long as the intent of the law is clear, it can be enforced.
Re: (Score:3)
The summary is a mishmash of different stories. The DMA law (law they passed that I think you're talking about and talked about in the second paragraph) has nothing to do with the actual complaint. No companies regardless of whether they fall under the DMA are allowed to geoblock content within the EU states for the purposes of selling content. This law has been on the books for a long time.
You can't prevent someone living in say Amsterdam with a bank card issued by ING from paying on an Apple account regis
Re: (Score:2)
Reading the article it seems like Apple is blocking EU citizens from making purchases, or downloading apps / software, from countries outside the one they were in when setting-up and linking payment information to their Apple accounts. If I'm reading this right then essentially it's saying someone living in Germany using a credit card issued by a German bank can't make a purchase from an iTunes Store / Apple App Store, or other media services ran by third parties, from an online store in France despite bot
Re: They want global control of Apple? (Score:2)
The article suggests that Apple are blocking someone from using a German issued credit card to purchase "content" on an iPhone purchase in say Spain. This would be contrary to the single market and flat out illegal. Basically it is not permitted to have any policy that does not treat the EU as a single entity. Imagine buying an iPhone in Texas and then ot being able to use a credit card issued from a bank in Florida to purchase things on it. The EU is a single market and if as it appears Apple are not resp
this is already a subsidy to poorer countries (Score:2)
This kind of price segmentation generally has richer areas subsidizing poorer areas. If you have to charge the same price everywhere the price will be closer to the high side and poorer areas wont get a discount.
Although I guess that massive opens to opportunity for other suppliers to enter the market. Like a lower quality local provider might need able to exist if it doesn't have to compete with the artificially lower prices of the big guy that are subsidized by high prices in the richer areas.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd say it's more like preventing gouging of people in poorer countries.
Whut now? (Score:2)
While I'm sure price gouging is a pleasant side effect, wasn't this geo blocking a response to the EU wanting special rules applied within its borders?
I'm sure Apple would be happy to lift the geo blocking if they could also ignore EU regs.
Re: (Score:3)
Trying to skirt the law isn't supposed to be looked at kindly by the courts.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the INTERnet (Score:1, Insightful)
Everything on it should be accessible internationally by nature.
More “I can not compete” European taxe (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The EU's 4 freedoms is at stake here (Score:3)
The European single market is formed around 4 freedoms:
- Free movement of goods
- Free movement of capital
- Freedom to establish and provide services
- Free movement of labour
Any kind of country level blocking within the European single market will break those freedoms. Most companies comply with those rules: Netflix, Phone operators (there's no roaming within the block), etc etc etc.
The issue here seem to be that once labour moves to another country, they still want to be able to use the bank from the previous country (they have the right to) and Apple's default everywhere is that Credit Card country = App Store country. Also which app is available changes between countries within the single market, which is pretty bad.
Effectively, the App Stores for every European single market country needs to allow credit cards from the other countries as well. And then make it so that every content that is available in one country it is treated like a Eu single market thing.