Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 825 posts

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#381

Post by mmmmmbop »

trapped wrote: post #342

Why doesn't EU force European automakers with same laws? Users need to pay extra to even use freely provided Apple CarPlay on BMW. European Car makers have monopoly in the app ecosystem installed in the cars. Where is alternative App store for BMW, Benz, Audi, VW ?

The issue is that Apple is leveraging their dominant position to push a Spotify competitor. Apple Music is not subject to the 30% App Store fee, and so they can just simply undercut Spotify by 30%.

Going with your analogy, is BMW trying to push an Apple CarPlay competitor?

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#382

Post by oaiey »

zuhsetaqi wrote: post #318
zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

> no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. That’s not exactly right. If Spotify (just as an example) would acquire all of their customers through their website or desktop app then they would pay nothing to Apple. That fee is only there if a user does use the InApp purchase option which Spotify doesn’t have to offer. So they’re paying only 30% to Apple if the their customer has subscribed through the iOS Ap…

Where there are forbidden or prevented to inform the user that they can register somewhere else cheaper. This is explicitly mentioned by the EU commissioner in the press conference.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#383

Post by yunohn »

briandear wrote: post #367
yunohn wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what? The funny thing is that all of FAANG has their international HQs in the EU (Dublin, Ireland) for tax evasion purposes. I’d argue they are more reliant on the EU then.

Tax evasion is illegal. Tax avoidance is rational. Other EU countries have the ability to lower taxes right? It’s ironic that the EU is suing Apple because Spotify doesn’t want to pay 15% to Apple, yet the same people complaining of that have no problem with Apple attempting to avoid higher costs by having a non-Irish EU headquarters.

Government taxes are a different ballgame than private company (Apple) profits. Interesting that you see them as the same thing. :/

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#384

Post by fastball »

zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

Yeah, my stance has always been that companies should exist to:

1. deliver value.

2. capture a fraction of that value.

I think it is pretty clear in most cases that 30% is well above the value Apple is actually delivering with their App Store. It's not like Apple is building the apps for other people. You still have to build the app entirely on your own, the only thing Apple is doing is letting you distribute your app / distributing it for you, which costs pennies. People keep saying "but you wouldn't have devices to distribute your app to without Apple" and while that is true, Apple is already capturing the value for that part of the deal – they're selling the devices to customers. If they were giving away iPhones for free, that would be one thing. But if the only reason you are able to charge 30% is because you've monopolized distribution on a device that the user "owns", that is not ok.

Then there is the dubious value Apple claims to be providing to end-users by "maintaining the quality of the app store", but I don't think this is true anymore. Shit-tier apps get thru every day, and great apps get knocked for arbitrary reasons. Apps are pretty well sandboxed at this point, requiring explicit permission for most worrying features, so I don't really think Apple oversight is needed. Allow 3rd party app stores already.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#385

Post by nolok »

anoncake wrote: post #331
kryptiskt wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll do that when US people stop using America and Americans to describe themselves.

Why? That's hardly the fault of, say, the Swiss.

I don't disagree with you, but you couldn't really have picked a worst example (short of an an actual EU member country) given how their bilateral treaties with the EU means EU rules apply to do business in non-EU Switzerland.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#386

Post by treis »

echelon wrote: post #355
breakfastduck wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple have been in the music business much longer than Spotify.

Apple is now a monopoly. They shouldn't be allowed to run an App Store, and they should probably have their services division peeled away into a separate company. All of the mega tech monopolies need to be broken up. What business do any of them have being movie studios, advertising firms, car dealerships (Apple?), banks, and fifteen different marketplaces rolled into one? This is absurd. Tech would be better if neit…

>They shouldn't be allowed to run an App Store, and they should probably have their services division peeled away into a separate company.

I think the ship has sailed on App stores. They're just better than the alternative and consumers are used to them. I'd consider them an integral part of the OS.

The problem is the fees. 30% is excessive especially so for in-app purchases where the customer is already acquired. The easiest and cleanest solution is to just cap these to something more reasonable. Something like 5% or maybe CC transaction costs + a couple percent.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#387

Post by yunohn »

jquery wrote: post #375
yunohn wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what? The funny thing is that all of FAANG has their international HQs in the EU (Dublin, Ireland) for tax evasion purposes. I’d argue they are more reliant on the EU then.

Nobody thinks of FAANG as EU creations. Even if Nintendo is headquartered in the USA, it’s still considered Japanese. IKEA is Swedish and so on. Where the companies were founded seems to play the largest role in their national identities.

I was making a comment more about how the socialist EU can offer better corporate taxes than the more "capitalist" country (USA).

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#388

Post by simion314 »

briandear wrote: post #371
simion314 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The standards could be in the SDK and the sandbox. Like you don't allow location data or access to photos to any apo (not even Apple ones). So even if I sideload an app or start a Apple app I should get same prompts("Do you want to let this app ignore your firewall rules? This might be insecure The app dev is "Facebook/Apple/Unkown) . And if Apple does not like Facebook tracking people maybe they should lobby for ant…

Why does there need to be anti-tracking laws? What if some people want to be tracked in exchange for a cheaper product? Apple allows people that value that to buy that.

The laws will be against hidden tracking, you can track but you need to be transparent about it and if you misuse the tracking you should pay.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#389

Post by pembrook »

echelon wrote: post #355
breakfastduck wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple have been in the music business much longer than Spotify.

Apple is now a monopoly. They shouldn't be allowed to run an App Store, and they should probably have their services division peeled away into a separate company. All of the mega tech monopolies need to be broken up. What business do any of them have being movie studios, advertising firms, car dealerships (Apple?), banks, and fifteen different marketplaces rolled into one? This is absurd. Tech would be better if neit…

I’m not sure you understand what monopoly means.

Nobody is mad that Apple/Amazon/Netflix/etc are creating competition for banks, movie studios, car dealers, etc.

The complaints about these companies are the specific areas where they hold a dominant position and unfair advantage over other companies. The App Store in the case of Apple/Google, advertising in the case of Google, etc. The areas where these companies have a stranglehold on distribution is the problem.

Amazon and Apple having movie studios and banking aspirations makes competition BETTER, not worse. Literally nobody is mad at Apple for having a credit card or funding movie productions.

Apple has zero control over credit card distribution or automobile purchasing. Why the hell would you want to protect the big banks and lazy old car companies from having to compete with Apple?

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#390

Post by nolok »

adriancooney wrote: post #240
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #46

Since this is an EU case, that should mean it'll actually do something, and won't take a decade and a half to conclude. The penalty won't be the big deal here, it'll be what Apple is prohibited from doing. And it'll be really exciting if the precedent set blows back on the entire 30%-rent-seeking-platform-industry.

Is it fair to call Apple's platform rent-seeking? I think a 30% cut is certainly far too much but I wouldn't call it rent-seeking. The platform itself provides a lot of value and they are entitled to charge something for it.

The problem is that if Apples' services have a price, then they should price it out, like any provider.

"Here's the price to have your app in the store, here is the one for one download, here is the one for an update".

Having a blanket "buffet" pricing (sub is 1€ or 100€ ? Doesn't matter it's a set % you owe us !), making it illegal to let the user get the app another way, making it impossible for them to not pay through Apple (and then pay back Apple what you we them for the service you use) is why they're going to lose.

Post reply on HN