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

Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

ca.finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 635 posts

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#521

Post by thunderfork »

avar wrote: post #457
rzwitserloot wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Technically, the first amendment applies only to state actors, not private entities. That's probably not what the person you're responding to is talking about. Americans have this unfortunate tendency to harp on and on about 'free speech' in contexts where the first amendment obviously does not apply, or, even more intriguingly/ironically, where the first amendment pretty clearly states the exact opposite. For exam…

> Whereas what the 1A actually > states is the exact opposite: > That platform has the right to > ban that user, and the > government is constitutionally > restrained: If the government > were to make a law that forces > this social network to unban > this user, that'd be the 1A > violation. If I build a bridge and offer it for public use for a toll, and I overhear you saying something I don't like as you travel acro…

[dead]

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#522

Post by [deleted] »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #456
Aloisius wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's not literally sold? I've been confused about this for a while. Given data is what allows them a unique advantage for their advertising product, it seemed odd that Facebook would sell that data to others. But to hear people talk, a company could literally buy personal information from Facebook.

Yeah, that makes sense. Facebook wants the data so they can provide more accurate advertising "cohorts". The accuracy is the value that other people see, hence "selling" the data even though they're really selling an ad view.

[deleted]

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#523

Post by pmontra »

tpmoney wrote: post #500
sabellito wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Show signs of rent seeking behaviour" seems like an extremely generous position. Forbidding your customers from even mentioning The Outside is full-on rent seeking behaviour, since its inception.

To steel man the policy, one thing it helps avoid is the free rider problem. Apples store terms are than free apps don’t pay a commission to Apple. But someone has to pay for the costs of developing the SDKs and the platform. We no longer live in an age where Apple or Microsoft gets away with charging for multi thousand dollar per year per seat developer license for their platforms, but that doesn’t mean those platfo…

Ultimately all the money Apple is making from the store comes from the pockets of people. If apps won't have to pay a cut to Apple, people would be left with more money in their pockets.

If all apps were free and no sales would be forced to go through those apps, Apple still sells the phones and makes money from them. Would it be left with less money? Not my problem. Would it increase the cost of phones (maybe only in the EU) to compensate the missing revenues? Fair. Let's see how it affects sales.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#524

Post by sagarpatil »

madeofpalk wrote: post #11

> Under the DMA, app developers distributing their apps via Apple's App Store should be able to inform customers, free of charge, of alternative offers outside the App Store, steer them to those offers and allow them to make purchases. To me, this is the most easily agreeable part of what the EU has been after. It is unfair that Apple restricts Netflix from telling it's users that they can sign up and pay for Netlifx…

Elon was very vocal about this, he asked subscribers to directly buy from the website. There’s a 30% discount.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#526

Post by PlunderBunny »

mrangle wrote: post #402
madeofpalk wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it should! Then Apple's App Store and IAP could compete on its own merits, rather than restricting competition from existing at all.

Apple does compete on its own merits. Its merits are that it built and controls the operating system and hardware that people choose to buy. If other companies have an issue, then they can build their own software, their own hardware, and compete.

I bet the Robber Barons said something like “Don’t like it? Build your own railway!” too.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#527

Post by pests »

dmitrygr wrote: post #506
pests wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not talking about "other phones." We are talking about iPhones. The market is "iPhone users" not just "phone users".

The parent post said “service that's arguably a necessity to participate in public life”. I’m not sure what universe you live in, but in mine everyday life is entirely possible without iPhones.

Ah, didn't catch that line.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#528

Post by HamsterDan »

sapphicsnail wrote: post #372
fc417fc802 wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed with your first point. Regarding TikTok though the argument was never (AFAIK) that they were actively breaking the law but rather that their structure and ownership posed a threat to US interests. That's pretty reasonable and largely mirrors China's stance against the US. If anything the surprising thing is how lenient western governments tend to be towards foreign corporations. They seem to prioritize free tr…

I find this so confusing. Rupert Murdoch and Elon Musk are foreigners who are both demonstrably influencing American politics through media they control. What makes Tiktok different?

[flagged]

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#529

Post by simondotau »

madeofpalk wrote: post #502
supernova87a wrote: post #501

Genuine question for debate: iPhone app store is a private club to which businesses can choose to belong, if they want to sell their product to certain customers. Membership in the club comes with the condition that you not talk about alternative ways to buy the same product, while selling via the club. Membership in the club is not a monopoly; there are many other channels through which to sell a company's products.…

Because EU law says they have let others into their club.

Apple has always allowed anyone into their club. You have to pay dues and follow some strict (but non-discriminatory) rules, but the result was a place which people liked going to.

Analogies aside, the REAL question is whether Apple is entitled to charge money for access to their developer APIs. Or whether Apple is entitled to place software license terms upon use of their intellectual property, e.g. when you link against Apple libraries which are then compiled into your binary.

We get up in arms about GPL violations, but also want Apple to suck shit. I don't think it's right to want it both ways.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#530

Post by kjkjadksj »

immibis wrote: post #493
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Commission forcing us to change our business model This is total, utter, complete 100% grade A organic nonsense. I worked at FB (but the same is true of basically all action driven advertising systems). Only a tiny proportion of users ever click, but they are incredibly lucrative for online advertising platforms. The whole subscription was a really transparent attempt to get people to accept the tracking and it…

Ads work even if nobody clicks. At least, old school ads. Sensible ads. Like Coca-Cola. I have no idea how these ridiculous online gaming things stay in business but I'm sure it's much stupider.

Did you buy coca cola because santa clause was drinking it or did you buy it because it was at eye level by the register in every store in America?
Post reply on HN