EU Orders Apple To Open Ecosystem To Rivals (reuters.com) 130
EU antitrust regulators ordered Apple on Wednesday to open its closed ecosystem to competitors, detailing how the company must comply with the bloc's Digital Markets Act or face potential fines. The European Commission's decision comes six months after initiating proceedings against the tech giant.
The first order requires Apple to grant rival smartphone, headphone and VR headset manufacturers access to its technology for seamless connectivity with Apple devices. A second order establishes specific processes for responding to app developers' interoperability requests. Apple criticized the decision, saying: "Today's decisions wrap us in red tape, slowing down Apple's ability to innovate for users in Europe." EU antitrust chief Teresa Ribera countered: "We are simply implementing the law." Non-compliance could trigger investigations resulting in fines up to 10% of Apple's global annual sales.
The first order requires Apple to grant rival smartphone, headphone and VR headset manufacturers access to its technology for seamless connectivity with Apple devices. A second order establishes specific processes for responding to app developers' interoperability requests. Apple criticized the decision, saying: "Today's decisions wrap us in red tape, slowing down Apple's ability to innovate for users in Europe." EU antitrust chief Teresa Ribera countered: "We are simply implementing the law." Non-compliance could trigger investigations resulting in fines up to 10% of Apple's global annual sales.
What does this look like in practice? (Score:1)
So does this mean that pressing play on my keyboard will now launch Spotify instead of Apple Music, or what?
Re:What does this look like in practice? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't that be nice, to have that be selectable?
Re: (Score:1)
It's a thing, it's called android.
legit question... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm no apple fanboi or EU legal expert, but what's the basis for justifying telling a business to allow competitors access to apple's tech?
If apple prefers their walled-garden business strategy, why can't they do just that?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:legit question... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:legit question... (Score:4, Informative)
You have misunderstood who is being protected here. This action isn't about the end user being able to load whatever software they want. The action is instead about Apple abusing its market dominance to keep competitors out of its ecosystem, or to charge developers abusive rates for access to its customers. The injured parties are the app developers who want to reach iPhone customers, but don't want to pay Apple's 30% commissions for everything they sell.
Re: (Score:2)
FIFTEEN PERCENT!!!
Only fairly-successful Developers (over $1 million in annual App Sales) pay that 30 percent.
Incessantly Chanting "OMG!!! Thirty Percent!!!1!11!!" is nothing more than The Big Lie.
Re:legit question... (Score:4, Insightful)
This isn't about "dominance", it is about following the law. The law requires interoperability, so you either provide it, or are violating it.
And if you've decided to violate the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences.
Re:legit question... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a law, not a biblical commandment.
Who's claiming the above except you?
There are bad laws.
Yes there are. There are laws that aren't bad. Like this one.
This is one of them.
This is, like, your opinion, man. But you're wrong.
the best solution to monopolies is to allow free competition,
And the only way to ensure competition is by laws that prohibit anti-competitive behavior and are properly enforced.
A monopoly profiting excessively will invite competition,
Nothing of the sort - a monopoly profiting excessively has already removed the competition. And competition isn't coming back, because any competition will face very entry costs, not lower. Basic economics 101, you know, that you "free market" libertardians are ignorant of.
Apple believe
What you think Apple believes is irrelevant.
There's a law, this law is there for a good reason and was passed after a serious discussion and analysis, accepting input from even Apple.
They have a choice - obey it or leave the market. There's a 1000 euros here that says they'll obey the law. Want to bet against it?
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, we have a new edgelord here.
A bit thin on the substance, but look, ma, how many caps.
Re: (Score:2)
It's there because FREE MONEY.
No money is involved in this interaction. Apple will either decide to comply, or that this market isn't worth the hassle and leave.
If the EU had set small fines, then it would make sense for companies to consider the fines as the cost of doing business. But the EU set fines at a dissuasive level, meaning no business will make the decision to pay the fine and continue. Apple will either comply before the fine, or leave the moment they are ordered to pay.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a law, not a biblical commandment. There are bad laws. This is one of them.
Boy, is THAT an understatement!
Re: (Score:1)
Does not fix the problem that the software you want is not available.
Does no fix the problem that the software I just wrote can not access "restricted APIs" on Apple.
If I write software you can use on Android, why is Apple allowed to prohibit me from porting the same software to Apple?
And more interesting: why are you okay with that?
You want to be forced that you can use my software only on Android? Want to be forced to buy a second phone? What about you own a company with a thousand employees? And my softw
Re:legit question... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
This is true, but this antitrust protection is aimed at preventing Apple's abuse of other app developers. It's not about YOUR choice of phone. If an app developer wants to reach Apple customers, they must pay Apple's abusive fees, or else not participate in the marketplace.
Re: (Score:1)
If an app developer wants to reach Apple customers, they must pay Apple's abusive fees, or else not participate in the marketplace.
How is this bad for the market? To me it would appear that "abusive fees" on the developers they rely upon to add value to their iProducts would be detrimental to their profits, and without profits they'd go out of business.
If the best app developers can not or will not pay the fees to gain Apple users as users of their app then doesn't that hurt Apple for not having the same options of quality apps for their iProducts? I would expect such an activity to drive people to Apple competitors. Apple is a prov
Re: (Score:2)
There is no problem with Apple wanting to make a profit. The problem, from the perspective of antitrust law, is that Apple's dominant market position allows them to charge fees that are unreasonable. Unreasonable is defined as profits they would not be able to command in a competitive market. We can get a good idea of what a competitive rate is, by looking at other online store systems like Shopify, which charges https://www.shopify.com/retail... Apple's fee is literally 10x more. There is no way Apple can
Re: (Score:1)
The law is not about prices of fees.
It is about the fact that you can not access specific APIs
A 30% fee might be a bit high for "in app purchases" but for everything else it is completely reason able.
If you would host your Apps on your own servers, your costs for selling stuff would probably be 90% of the sales price.
Re: legit question... (Score:2)
31% market share in the EU. Presumably Android is most of the rest. Samsung is the single biggest vendor at 37%. It just looks like the EU is anti-Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
How about you try to talk like an adult?
I'm perfectly capable of reading but comparing Apple's business to a completely unrelated one (Shopify) is in irrelevant. It's not a sound basis for arguing that Apple charges too much. Furthermore, it also ignores that doesn't charge 30% in all cases. The case put was that Apple abused their dominant position, but they don't have a dominant position. Don't like an iPhone, go with something else.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember a lot of similar whine back when the EU mandated uniform USB chargers.
"OOhhooohahhhgarrrhaa EU bad Oypple innuvashon vill be gone arrghghhghgh marghghghghh red tape shoshulizm arrghghgh whargarblll"
Fast forward a few years, literally everything I have has a USB charging ports on everything that needs power, goes by with 2 mutiport USB chargers and 3 cables instead of lugging around a kilo of chargers and cables for every device.
Has the "innovation" been "stifled"? Did the problems of the "whargar
Re: (Score:2)
They don't have to be a monopoly, they just have to be distorting the market with their policies.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is not a monopoly. You have many choices for phones
You have two choices. Android and Apple. That's it.
Re: (Score:1)
You know, there are two kinds of people.
Those who can count, and those who can't.
You have so many Apple choices, I can not count them. So many models. Some with stone age old power connectors, like my iPhone 4s, some with that lightening (gosh who comes to that name ? Sounds pretty dangerous!) adapter and now the USB-Cs and this magic charging through tin air ... and and and
And then you have the Androids, with old school USB ... new school USB ... super charging with microwaves - be careful, your balls get
Re:legit question... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think that's really comparable. Nor do I think GP is understanding correctly. They don't appear to be asking for technology transfers. To put it another way, they're saying if apple makes an icar, it has to be able to drive on regular roads, not just the iroad.
Re: (Score:3)
Upvote this comment
Re: (Score:3)
It's not about letting the iCar only drive on other roads. It's more like say Tesla having their remote app and being forced to allow anyone to make a remote app to talk to the car. Or allow anyone to write their own OS or software for the car.
The same arguments about interoperability versus security/safety apply. I mean, there are surely many companies out there capable of writing their own vehicle control software for a Tesla, or Ford, or GM or whoever, why shouldn't they be allowed to "access" the hard
Re:legit question... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's more like say Tesla having their remote app and being forced to allow anyone to make a remote app to talk to the car.
In other words, a documented API specification. Why do you figure this a problem?
Or allow anyone to write their own OS or software for the car.
This doesn't appear to be part of the scope of what they're asking for. Why are you getting the idea that it is?
The same arguments about interoperability versus security/safety apply.
And they're bullshit in this case, much like the same arguments against right to repair.
Re: (Score:2)
The same arguments about interoperability versus security/safety apply. I mean, there are surely many companies out there capable of writing their own vehicle control software for a Tesla, or Ford, or GM or whoever, why shouldn't they be allowed to "access" the hardware features of the vehicle?
A better comparison might be John Deere.
Re:legit question... (Score:4, Informative)
they're saying if apple makes an icar, it has to be able to drive on regular roads, not just the iroad.
and that you can put any tire brand you want on it, not just iTires.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't the consumers deserve to get a choice in walled garden or multiple app stores?
LOL, sorry I couldn't say that with a straight face. Most phone users are idiots and barely understand the one app store they already have. Two or more? That's crazy!
So I suppose we must protect consumers from choice so as to protect them from themselves. Poor stupid consumers.
Is Google getting this same treatment or have they already bowed down? Some of this just sounds like fleecing US tech for money. Did you notice the fi
Re: legit question... (Score:2)
Re:legit question... (Score:5, Informative)
They are called antitrust laws, they stop large organizations using their power to unduly influence the market. If you grow big enough you can effectively stifle any competition. Its effectively bulling on an industrial scale.
Re: legit question... (Score:3)
âoeStifling innovationâ. âoeBullying at an industrial scale.â
This is exactly what the EU is doing telling a business how they must play with competitors.
Apple is not a utility.
There are other cell phone, computer, and VR headset makers out there. What specific âoetechnologyâ must Apple share?
Developers can get developer accounts and write apps for the various platforms. They can purchase hardware, like we do if they want to build hardware to extend or interoperate with it.
Wh
Re: (Score:1)
posted from my iPhone
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Say you buy some Air Pod headphones, a few Air Tags. Then you drop your phone and need a new one, but decide you don't like the new iPhone. Problem is that they don't work very well with Android phones. You are locked in, with a hefty exit fee if you want out.
Or maybe you are happy with your iPhone, but would prefer not to use iCloud. Unfortunately all other cloud apps don't work as well because iCloud has access to secret APIs and is exempt from the usual aggressive power management that prevents long back
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Antitrust regulations in Europe start applying above 10-15% market share. Formally the criterion is 50 million monthly users.
Re: (Score:1)
As other posts have pointed out there are plenty of Android devices available for anyone who wants one
You are just an idiot, right?
How the fuck does an Android phone access the users data in the Apple cloud?
Oh it can't.
The rule is not about the user buying hardware. It is about programmers and users being able to do what Apple can do. Can I write my own payment app? Sure. But it does not run. The API blocks the function calls.
It has nothing to do with android versus apple. Or users buying phones. It is abou
Re: (Score:3)
I'm no apple fanboi or EU legal expert, but what's the basis for justifying telling a business to allow competitors access to apple's tech?
The law of the land. [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm no apple fanboi or EU legal expert, but what's the basis for justifying telling a business to allow competitors access to apple's tech?
If apple prefers their walled-garden business strategy, why can't they do just that?
I'm surprised to find myself possibly in agreement with you. I hate Apple's products, UI, ecosystem, and lock-in, so their products aren't for me. At the same time, I've come to believe - tentatively - that they have the right to sell their locked-in, locked-down shit in a locked-down market. But I added the "possibly" and "tentatively" because there's an aspect of the smartphone market that really bothers me.
I also believe that people should be able to choose TOTAL freedom over their operating system, apps
Re: (Score:2)
So I feel that some kind of legislative intervention is necessary, to force manufacturers and service providers to offer a freedom-honouring, privacy-honouring option to anyone who wants it.
I don't see how the EU legislation does that. In fact, I would argue it does the opposite. What creates the demand for an alternative when the EU has declared they will step in and micromanage any mobile platform? For the most part their requirements will insist that every platform be the same. They want it to be a PC.
The EU has the power to prop up a third platform that meets all of their specifications. They could put out an RFQ for a mobile platform that meets their specifications, contract it out, and t
Re: (Score:1)
It doesn't take a lot of creativity for the EU countries to ensure that platforms that meet their criteria are available to consumers.
Of course not.
But it would need a lot of money, and a market who wants the new product.
The market is 90% settled around Apple and Android. So? What would be the point? Lets call the new Phone initiative Eureka, why not? So Eureka is an developers and users dream. Everything can be done with it, just as the EU dreamt it up. Eureka!
And now? I write an App for it. Cute. Angel wr
Re: legit question... (Score:2)
I agree in principle that regulation against abuse of position should be addressed in a just society. There are arguably other ways to do business through alliances and standards.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm no apple fanboi or EU legal expert, but what's the basis for justifying telling a business to allow competitors access to apple's tech?
If apple prefers their walled-garden business strategy, why can't they do just that?
https://digital-markets-act.ec... [europa.eu]
Re: (Score:1)
A phone is a phone is a phone: is a computer.
If I can write software for that computer, but can not use the GPS functionality, or the internet or NFC(near field communicator) - but Apple can: I have a big disadvantage. Of course this are only examples, for the lack of better ones.
Point is that Apple has dozens of APIs that are kept secret, and are not available for random programmers like me. I mean: you could compile your code against them, but the APIs would reject your calls.
Apple now has to open its OS/
Re: (Score:2)
Its always strange that people who laud capitalism don't seem to understand that lockins are not the open market.
Would love some of this leadership in USA (Score:4, Insightful)
Pot meet kettle (Score:3, Interesting)
And, predictably.... (Score:3)
Apple (via Tim Cook) back in 2017 [cnbc.com]:
Now, who didn't see this coming from Apple from that decision?
Re:And, predictably.... (Score:4, Interesting)
When's the last time Apple innovated something, anyway? AI-generated emoji schlock? A crappy notched screen that is always annoying? Crappy AI that nobody uses because the things that people might want (better Siri) are so shitty that they can't even ship it as a "beta"? Or maybe each version of macOS that is worse than the last one, and doesn't ever fix long-standing issues?
No wait, that last one is a Microsoft "innovation" that debuted with Windows 8.
Re: (Score:2)
Following the law and being happy about it are entirely different things. Complaining about the law doesn't make him a hypocrite, nor does trying to obtain a favorable interpretation of the law in court.
Open Market (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey genius, why do you think they call it champagne?
Re:Open Market (Score:5, Informative)
Also Pro Open Market EU: Champagne can only be made in one part of France
Alcoholic drinks labelled as 'Champagne' can only be made in one part of France - doesn't preclude a similar "sparkling wine" [wikipedia.org] from being produced anywhere else.
I believe it's the same with Tequila.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
And Bourbon, in case anyone thinks that the US wouldn't be hypocritical about this.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever purchased bourbon made in EU, UK, Japan or anywhere else in the world?
Re: (Score:2)
Bourbon was (is) the name of the French Royal Family so it would be fair use for the French to make any Bourbon they like.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the trade laws that the US has signed with basically everyone saying that the alcoholic beverage titled "bourbon whiskey" must have these three properties:
1. made with at least 51% corn in the mash
2. aged in charred white oak barrels that have never been previously used
3. must be distilled, aged, and bottled within the territorial boundaries of the United States of America
See: 27 CFR 5.22 [cornell.edu] in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess we could call it Bourbon Liquor ;-)
I did not know the barrels were single use only. That explains why there is a market for rums aged in Bourbon barrels.
All that talk of good things, got to be 5PM somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, let's smack around the EU for having exclusivity to calling sparkling wine "champagne" all the while being fine with "bourbon" only being able to be produced in the US under the exact same reasoning, with the rest of the world free to create whiskey with a mash that is at least 51% corn, and aged in previously-unused charred white-oak barrels.
Re: (Score:1)
You can make Champagne everywhere.
But Champagne is a region.
So: if you for example make Champagne in Spain, then it is called Carva (loosely translated as: made in a cave), and you sell it under your brand, or under your region name, or call it what it is: Carva. Because it is not Champagne - as it is not made in the Champagne. An example would be Frexenet (a brand).
What is next? Oysters from a random Chinese farm can be sold as âoeFines de Claire - Marennes Oleron"? Or Parma ham from a random pork far
ok apple will add an 0.50 euro fee per user for in (Score:2)
ok apple will add an 0.50 euro fee per user for interoperability access.
Re: (Score:2)
ok apple will add an 0.50 euro fee per user for interoperability access.
... thereby proving they're anti-competitive, justifying the regulation.
perhaps (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Europe could replace the iPhone with a local version?
Or just use Android instead.
Re: (Score:1)
Once the EU kicks Apple out they'll need to go after the game consoles, TV manufacturers, car manufacturers, razor manufacturers, printer manufacturers, and so on and so on. It'll be wonderful to watch... from a distance.
Re: (Score:1)
It'll be wonderful to watch... from a distance.
And make sure you stay that distance, otherwise we'll kick your fuckin' asses.
Re: (Score:2)
* cars, razors, printers: not concerned here, the law in question is only about interoperability of digital services, not at all about hardware parts.
* TV manufacturers: this law would apply if there existed a "Netflix TV" that would ONLY allow you to use Netflix as service provider (but there isn't such a thing, at least according to a quick search on internet).
Re: (Score:2)
I'm all seriousness, the EU has companies like Nokia and Alcatel.
Apple should just concede (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple never actually thought people needed a "daddy" to hold their hand. Their walled garden is about greed, nothing else.
Apple built a marketplace, app devs want a free... (Score:2)
Re:Just pull out of the EU then... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is big enough and important enough they could announce they were pulling out of the EU.
This would cause such an uproar that the EU would likely have to rescind the order...
Honestly, this could probably work...but ironically, the fact that it could work is why the mandate is being implemented in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not forget who is lobbying the europeans for this - Epic, a game developer who wants to sell stuff on iPhone without the Apple-tax.
Two yank companies, last I checked.
Re:Just pull out of the EU then... (Score:5, Informative)
The EU has a GDP of almost $21T, 35 million smartphone shipments per year, 33% of those belong to Apple, so about 12 millions phones per year.
Yes, they could drop all that in the hope the public puts their blame on the EU and not Apple themselves and really the answer is they will blame everybody, there's not a world where Apple pulls out of all of the EU and comes out better on the other side. I don't know, I don't see how that is going to end up better for the company than just complying and adding in a feature that less than 10% of your users are going to engage with anyways.
Re: (Score:2)
More than that, the reaction of "well I'm taking my ball and going home" basically proves that they want to have whatever customer-surly behavior they are being accused of.
I don't know why it's such a burden to open up iDevices when they've been doing it for decades on the Mac. Someone has yet to rationally explain that.
Re:Just pull out of the EU then... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know why it's such a burden to open up iDevices when they've been doing it for decades on the Mac. Someone has yet to rationally explain that.
Because I don't want my phone to be a PC, I want it to be an appliance. Apple views the phone as an appliance, their customers view it as an appliance, but malware authors, surveillance state governments, and Epic Games desperately want it to be a PC.
How long before you get the message, "To install Microsoft Teams, you have to first download the Microsoft Store."
"To install your company's 2-factor authorization app, you first have to download the Facebook Store."
"To apply for a loan, you need to install your bank's app, which is only available on the Salesforce Store."
"To file your taxes, you need to install the IRS app from the Oracle Store."
These fuckers (Microsoft, Epic, Facebook, etc.) who have lobbied for this legislation just want to root my phone. They already make a point of disabling features that work just fine in the browser when on mobile to force you to download their app. They want to force Apple to cede full control of the phone so none of your contacts, calls, location, texts, or notes are private. They've been trying to force Apple to create a backdoor and this is how they're doing it.
Re: Just pull out of the EU then... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Apple should shut down Apple accounts for all EU leaders and bureaucrats, and their families a week later.
Make them feel the pain.
Re: (Score:2)
All this would do create the perfect means for an EU law that says all EU leaders are required to not use Apple phones and given those same leaders an easy soapbox to use this as an example of exactly why Apple needs regulation.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, use your abusive position for abuse. That'll show those antitrust regulators!
Re: (Score:2)
I would genuinely like to see it happen. Mostly because I'd like to see how something like that shakes out. On a regular basis Apple, or Amazon, "Somebody" gets this treatment and I'm not saying that they do or don't have it coming. Not taking a position. We all see this response and yeah, it could happen I guess but what would be the fallout. I'd like to find out just once.
Re:Just pull out of the EU then... (Score:4, Informative)
Or that tactic could massively backfire. An American company deciding they don't like the rules and invoking a bargaining tactic of threatening to leave could create an uproar against Apple. This is especially true in the current political climate. US tech giants aren't exactly at their peak of popularity right now. The desire to reign in these companies may see people side with the government on this one.
The bigger worry for the EU is reprisals from Trump, but since Trump is constantly threatening the EU with tariffs anyhow it could be that the threat is no longer effective. If he threatens them no matter what they do, they have no incentive to change their behaviour to avoid it. The constant threats have already set popular opinion against the US (leading to people already voluntarily boycott US produced goods), so they'll have the public's support in any confrontation.
Re: Just pull out of the EU then... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe the next White House South Lawn billionaire-welfare product promotional press event will feature Macs, iPads, and iPhones?
Just think of the poor billionaires!
Re: (Score:3)
For some reason you think that this would hurt the EU more than Apple.
#MAGAtard! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
its quite funny that even you know "jesus, this is probably too stupid for even me to sign my name to"
Re: (Score:2)
Without the US, that would probably be a pretty even match.
Russia has drained their current manpower and armament, and the EU didn't have much to begin with.
Re: (Score:3)
The EU countries have air forces which could easily overpower whatever Russia might have in their air force. As we've seen time and again, Russian pilots do not have the skills necessary in modern warfare. Even their maintenance is sub-standard.
As for the remainder, the EU will have learned from Ukraine. I'm not saying it would be a pushover, but the fight would definitely be lopsided in a short time.
Re: (Score:1)
The EU countries have air forces which could easily overpower whatever Russia might have in their air force.
The biggest threat to aircraft in Ukraine hasn't been opposing aircraft. The biggest threat has been highly effective ground based anti-aircraft systems. Perhaps the greatest threat has been man-portable air defense systems like Javelin, Stinger, and Gremlin. There are of course other systems that are portable, such as Patriot, and mobile, such as Tunguska and Avenger.
There's some fixed site air defense scattered about Europe which have far more range than anything that can be moved. This is almost cert
Re: (Score:1)
Without the US, that would probably be a pretty even match.
Well then, bring on the entertainment for the rest of us!
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure that ASML would love to hear your theory about how no innovation is happening in Europe, while they're selling the most advanced chipmaking machines on the planet to TSMC to manufacture the devices you're using to bitch on the Internet with.
Re: (Score:2)
The regulation in question is the "Digital Markets Act". It applies to digital services only, not hardware at all. I do hope they one day force Samsung, Google (and I guess Apple as well) to open their proprietary earbud systems, but it is not under the scope of this law.