Dutch Court Confirms Apple Abused Dominant Position in Dating Apps (yahoo.com) 8
A Dutch court on Monday confirmed a 2021 consumer watchdog's ruling saying that Apple had abused its dominant position by imposing unfair conditions on providers of dating apps in the App Store. From a report: The Rotterdam District Court ruled that the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) was therefore right to impose an order subject to a penalty for non-compliance. The court ruled that ACM was right in finding that dating app providers had to use Apple's own payment system, were not allowed to refer to payment options outside the App Store, and had to pay a 30% commission (15% for small providers) to Apple.
Ony Subs Allowed In Dutchland? (Score:4, Funny)
I thought the Dutch were more open and inclusive. This just seems like kink shaming.
Nothing wrong with that. (Score:3)
Don't kink shame kink shaming.
Are you the one? (Score:2)
Translation (Score:1)
In Dutch, this means that they don't care if people get catfished or worse as long as they are able to make more money off of the practice. Have you noticed that governments always seem to want to sue their way out of financial distress?
Re: (Score:1)
> they don't care if people get catfished or worse as long as
That is an interesting angle on this, and does highlight an outstanding problem. At heart though, this is an easy-vs-hard difference. While it is easy to force one entity (Apple here) to change their rule on a specific area - on the other hand, stopping people from getting catfished is really hard.
"There's one born every minute" is still true and probably always will be.
Re:Translation (Score:4, Insightful)
In Dutch, this means that they don't care if people get catfished or worse
This has zero to do with catfishing. Quite a few of the Dutch dating apps are subscription based.
Also Apple are not the police, they are not the judge, and they do not offer banking protections from catfishing. Financial transactions are already well protected against fraud in most European countries, you don't need to go begging to a corporate entity like Apple or Mastercard for consumer protection.
Have you noticed that governments always seem to want to sue their way out of financial distress?
The government didn't sue anyone, and isn't under financial distress. This case was brough by a specific company hosting a dating app to a regulator citing specific violation of specific law. Any financial change to Apple here is nothing more than a 100% voluntary donation to the winning party given how laws are ... actually written down so you know what you need to do to follow them.
I'm genuinely sorry that your favourite company got caught doing something illegal again. Maybe when you're done bootlicking for a corporation you can let them know where they went wrong to produce a more favourable outcome in the future.
So with the App Store, they made millions... (Score:1)