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

571–580 of 635 posts

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#571

Post by maccard »

dns_snek wrote: post #554
maccard wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is exactly the argument against forcing Apple to change. The reason I use iOS is because of the App Store. If meta create a meta store for Facebook and Instagram, and pull it from the App Store, then the platform that I use for that feature is no longer viable for me, and neither is the competing platform. Right now you have a choice, as do I - an open ecosystem on android or a closed ecosystem on iOS. By fo…

Every single thread on this topic devolves into "if you don't like Apple just use Android" or vice versa and it's so predictable and boring. Again, like I pointed out in my previous comment, it's not just about you or me as consumers and our immediate preferences. Apple's and Google's anti-competitive behavior is stifling innovation with their policies and fees. First and foremost this affects developers/businesses w…

> Every single thread on this topic devolves into "if you don't like Apple just use Android" or vice versa and it's so predictable and boring.

But this is exactly why this whole topic isn’t an issue. There currently _is_ choice, competition, and a viable alternative in the marketplace (unlike in the web browser space for example where chrome is eating everyone’s lunch).

> and if the only way for them to reach us for technical reasons is through native apps, then they're subject to whatever insane policies and fees these companies demand.

> based purely on preference, like "no porn", "no game emulators Except it’s not. PWAs and websites exist. People can watch, and pay for porn on safari just like they can on their laptop or desktop computer. Emulators you have a point in, but on my first point - if you want a platform that lets you bring your own toys, android lets you install them.

> charging a 30% tax

It’s not a tax. It’s a platform fee. If it was a tax, it would be applied to web browser purchases too, or all purchases made through Apple/Gooblr pay. I am perfectly free to distribute my android emulator via patreon and provide an APK to install and have been for a long time.

> Also your example with Meta's apps is a false dilemma. If you want to use their apps you can always install them from their own hypothetical app store, your choice isn't being taken away from you and it doesn't make the platform any less viable.

So it’s only a false dilemma when you disagree? My choice is being restricted in this. I want to use metas services, I don’t want to give them the keys to the kingdom. If they ship a meta store, then they don’t need to adhere to apples store rules (which is exactly the point) meaning they can do whatever they want. If I wanted that, I’d use another platform that exists where meta are free to publish a Facebook app that doesn’t adhere to the platform Guidelines.

> Can you elaborate on how this applies to your usage of Facebook?

I didn’t say this about Facebook, I used meta as one example of a service provider. I can give you another instead though - the App Store rules require Apple Pay as options for all apps. I trust Apple to handle and manage my payments appropriately, but I don’t trust ketchapp (they make shovelware games that are ad ridden and iap infested hell holes.) if ketchapp decide they want to collect extra data and not pay the “tax”, then they can publish a new ketchapp store where I can play their games, subject to their rules, i.e. they now manage my card payments directly. I don’t trust _them_ to not have dark patterns around subscription management, payment methods etc.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#572

Post by robertlagrant »

dns_snek wrote: post #550
robertlagrant wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more likely that insane societies do - elevate one person's consumer choices to national scale.

Sure, just one person's consumer choice to curb anti-competitive behavior which is artificially raising prices for everyone and restricting innovation. Among other fringe choices like having electrical appliances that don't kill us, paint that doesn't cause brain damage, cars that don't poison our air, and rivers that aren't full of toxic chemicals.

Mobile phones have had one of the most rapid price plummets and feature additions in history. The only thing stopping another competitor is the fact that it's so hard to compete with them, because they're incredible value for money and there isn't a market being gouged that can be un-gouged.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#573

Post by realusername »

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…

> But someone has to pay for the costs of developing the SDKs and the platform

I really do not want to use the iOS SDK which is utter garbage quality. The reason people use the Apple tooling is because they have no choice, in reality xcode is 10 years behind any modern web or native tooling.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#574

Post by alxlaz »

fidotron wrote: post #467
alxlaz wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the metaphors I've used are yours, Ivan. Why would they anger me? I'm not the one who came up with them :-). What you've pointed out has no bearing whatsoever on what's being discussed here. This isn't about some stretched out definition of "payment system" that applies to those services that happen to have both iOS and Android client applications. It's strictly about what works in applications available on Apple…

You're making a lot of noise to distract from the fact it is entirely possible to use other payment mechanisms for digital goods to consume in apps, and that from comparison to stores for physical goods we established that promoting other means for purchasing from the app on a given platform is an unreasonable expectation, exactly like expecting Coca Cola served in McDonalds to be allowed to be labelled "available fo…

I see we're back to Coca Cola, McDonalds and Burger King. Oh, and Meta, somehow? This is about Apple, I think you're in the wrong thread.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#575

Post by saagarjha »

dmitrygr wrote: post #435
Ukv wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a range of anti-competitive behavior which can subvert that ideal, and as such there's regulation aimed to prevent it. Apple used to forbid apps from telling users about Apple's 30% cut or cheaper places to buy the app, for instance, hindering users from making an informed choice. Many of the policies in question are intentionally not publicized to end-users, often requiring first paying to be part of the dev…

> intentionally not publicized to end-users Apple allows no-questions-asked full-refund returns for two weeks. > requiring first paying to be part of the developer program They are all available right here, online, without any purchase requirement: https://developer.apple.com/support/terms/

> Apple allows no-questions-asked full-refund returns for two weeks.

This doesn't respond to what you quoted.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#576

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

xvector wrote: post #488
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps the same regulations that US companies keep running afoul of are the regulations that prevent European investors from putting money behind European startup competitors. Nah, it's all the capital which gets invested into the US caused by the dollar's role in international payments that drives the US exceptionalism is tech. Like, 65% of world equity value relates to 4% of the world population. That's not sust…

You simply cannot dismiss the omnipresent differences in American and EU mindset/culture as playing a role in each country's entrepreneurial success and ability to build and scale innovations. There is a huge culture difference: Having spent time in both countries, an entrepreneurial spirit is valued far more in American culture and is far more present than in the EU.

I don't disagree (apart from the fact that the EU is 27 countries, not one).

Which countries did you spend time in?

I would still maintain that the reason the US is more entreprenuerial right now is because it's easier to get capital (particularly for tech focused businesses). Now, some of that is because of previous tech exits, some of it is culture but to maintain that the differences in capital don't have a large impact is also pretty reductionist.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#577

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

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.

> Ads work even if nobody clicks.

Correct, but those ads (brand) are much, much less common online because Google (first) and Facebook (second) pushed DR advertising, which is what most SMBs and smaller businesses do.

Like, some of this is because they're easier to measure which makes it easier to sell, but lots more of it was due to smaller businesses that couldn't afford brand spending money on something more connected to their business outcomes.

> I have no idea how these ridiculous online gaming things stay in business

Mostly whales. A really small proportion of users spend absurd amounts of money on these games, and much of the competitive games just advertise for free users to get crushed by the whales.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#578

Post by simondotau »

bitpush wrote: post #555
simondotau wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ag…

What if the exclusive club had one rule for owner operator and another for rest of the folks? Would you say that's pretty discriminatory?

If the club owner wants to have a fancy seat at the nicest table in the restaurant, that's not discrimination. It's their club. They built it. Everyone knows they built it, and they can think whatever they like about that fancy seat. If they want a similarly fancy seat, they can build their own club.

(Analogies aside, while I understand their rationale, it was wrong for Apple to lump the likes of Spotify and Netflix within their in-app purchase umbrella. And I also find it hilarious how people think 30% is highway robbery when 10+ years ago it was widely regarded as a fantastic deal for developers.)

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#579

Post by madeofpalk »

simondotau wrote: post #529
madeofpalk wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ag…

I think the preliminary findings make this pretty clear. Read it straight from the Commission, rather than blog spam https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_...

The people of EU decided it will be law that Apple must allow for alternate app distribution means - you must be able to side load and/or install alternate app marketplaces. That is the law, like how other countries have different laws for parental leave, for example.

The EU regulators have found that Apple has not complied with this law because it makes using alternate app marketplaces purposefully unattractive and burdonsome for both developers and users. EU is clamping down on Apple's 'malicious compliance'.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#580

Post by simondotau »

madeofpalk wrote: post #579
simondotau wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ag…

I think the preliminary findings make this pretty clear. Read it straight from the Commission, rather than blog spam https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_... The people of EU decided it will be law that Apple must allow for alternate app distribution means - you must be able to side load and/or install alternate app marketplaces. That is the law, like how other countries have different laws for…

It's not malicious compliance. If you want to distribute binaries which contain Apple intellectual property, you need a license, and the EU is not in a position to force Apple to abandon their intellectual property rights.

I am a hard-core fan of the GPL and I recognise that the GPL license requires intellectual property rights in order to work. You want copyleft worth a damn? You need copyright. And that means you get copyright. Apple has intellectual property rights over their software and that doesn't give anyone else the right to "do whatever they want" with it.

If you want to cancel all intellectual property rights with respect to software, that's an interesting argument to make. But cancelling it under a few rare circumstances when some software irritates you seems like the height of absurdity.

Post reply on HN