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

Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 188 posts

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#171

Post by stavros »

SllX wrote: post #119
ASalazarMX wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it makes me wonder what they can get away with in other countries that they are afraid to try in the EU.

You’re thinking of the GDPR. Apple’s citing the regulatory requirements imposed by the DMA, which are written down but remain unclear because the EC would apparently prefer Apple to figure out the “spirit” of the law and comply with that instead.

Well, you can either try to comply with the spirit of the law and work with the EU to clarify, or you can maliciously comply with the letter and get fined.

I'm not a lawyer, but I didn't need to be one to see the 0.5 €/user/yr fee and think "yeeeeah that won't fly".

Or maybe Apple's legal team should hire me to advise on the spirit of the law.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#172

Post by chucke1992 »

JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B wrote: post #70
chucke1992 wrote: post #38

The bigger question if it will affect Apple's sales in the region.

If guess it won’t affect anything. We have the same phone wars as everyone else: Samsung/Apple, Android/iOS, etc.

but that's the thing - the whole point of AI for Apple is to try to improve the stagnating iPhone sales. I wonder if it will lead to iPhone losing some marketshare in EU due to that.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#174

Post by TheLoafOfBread »

jedberg wrote: post #79
vletal wrote: post #53

I do not get it. If they are really into "private cloud", "your data belongs to you", ... They should be compliant out of the box. This decreases my trust in Apple.

It's the other way around. They are worried they will be forced to open their privacy to third parties who could circumvent their privacy controls.

Then it could be said, that their privacy control does not work, when you need to rely on security through obscurity.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#175

Post by alwillis »

Aloisius wrote: post #155
alwillis wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU accounted for more than $24 billion in revenue last quarter, the most revenue outside of North America. Obviously this isn't something Apple takes lightly. Take a look at Apple's Private Cloud Compute white paper [1] and explain how Apple's supposed to make it DMA-compliant without sacrificing its security and privacy guarantees. Short answer: they can't without essentially starting over. EU residents will get…

> The EU accounted for more than $24 billion in revenue last quarter, the most revenue outside of North America. Obviously this isn't something Apple takes lightly. "Europe", not the EU. And Apple's "Europe" segment isn't even just Europe. It also includes India, the Middle East and Africa.

Thanks for the correction.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#176

Post by alwillis »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #169
alwillis wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU accounted for more than $24 billion in revenue last quarter, the most revenue outside of North America. Obviously this isn't something Apple takes lightly. Take a look at Apple's Private Cloud Compute white paper [1] and explain how Apple's supposed to make it DMA-compliant without sacrificing its security and privacy guarantees. Short answer: they can't without essentially starting over. EU residents will get…

>Take a look at Apple's Private Cloud Compute white paper [1] and explain how Apple's supposed to make it DMA-compliant without sacrificing its security and privacy guarantees. Why should I figure it out for them? That's why they have so many highly skilled well paid engineers on their payroll, to solve stuff like this. It's not my job to solve their cloud architecture design issues. Why don't they use some of that 2…

> Until I get an unbiased opinion form a independent third party

A core feature of Apple’s Private Cloud Compute platform is the ability for 3rd parties to validate the integrity of the platform.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#177

Post by jedberg »

TheLoafOfBread wrote: post #174
jedberg wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the other way around. They are worried they will be forced to open their privacy to third parties who could circumvent their privacy controls.

Then it could be said, that their privacy control does not work, when you need to rely on security through obscurity.

It’s not security by obscurity. The law makes Apple turn over the keys to third parties.

You can’t secure your house if the law requires you to open the door to anyone who asks.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#178

Post by SllX »

stavros wrote: post #171
SllX wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re thinking of the GDPR. Apple’s citing the regulatory requirements imposed by the DMA, which are written down but remain unclear because the EC would apparently prefer Apple to figure out the “spirit” of the law and comply with that instead.

Well, you can either try to comply with the spirit of the law and work with the EU to clarify, or you can maliciously comply with the letter and get fined. I'm not a lawyer, but I didn't need to be one to see the 0.5 €/user/yr fee and think "yeeeeah that won't fly". Or maybe Apple's legal team should hire me to advise on the spirit of the law.

Dude, malicious compliance is not a real legal term and if Apple is charged, it's going to be for non-compliance, because even if you comply "maliciously", if you are compliant, then you are compliant. Either the text of the law matters, or it really doesn't, but out of the institutions that form the government of the European Union, the EC is the one with exclusive legislative initiative; the EU Parliament doesn't write the laws it is asked to vote on, nor do they have the power to compel (only ask) the EC to write a law so if anyone within the EU can write what they mean into the text of a law since they're also the ones who will be enforcing it, it is exactly the European Commission. The EC seems convinced that Apple's reading of the text is just wrong, and most likely the dust won't settle on this until they take this to the CJEU.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#179

Post by stavros »

SllX wrote: post #178
stavros wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you can either try to comply with the spirit of the law and work with the EU to clarify, or you can maliciously comply with the letter and get fined. I'm not a lawyer, but I didn't need to be one to see the 0.5 €/user/yr fee and think "yeeeeah that won't fly". Or maybe Apple's legal team should hire me to advise on the spirit of the law.

Dude, malicious compliance is not a real legal term and if Apple is charged, it's going to be for non -compliance, because even if you comply "maliciously", if you are compliant, then you are compliant. Either the text of the law matters, or it really doesn't, but out of the institutions that form the government of the European Union, the EC is the one with exclusive legislative initiative; the EU Parliament doesn't…

Well, Apple says it complied, the EU says it didn't. If the letter of the law was the whole law, this would be objective, but apparently it isn't, since they're disagreeing. As you say, there is the "reading of the text", and yes, it probably needs the CJEU.

Re: Apple won't roll out AI tech in EU market over regulatory concerns

#180

Post by SllX »

stavros wrote: post #179
SllX wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, malicious compliance is not a real legal term and if Apple is charged, it's going to be for non -compliance, because even if you comply "maliciously", if you are compliant, then you are compliant. Either the text of the law matters, or it really doesn't, but out of the institutions that form the government of the European Union, the EC is the one with exclusive legislative initiative; the EU Parliament doesn't…

Well, Apple says it complied, the EU says it didn't. If the letter of the law was the whole law, this would be objective, but apparently it isn't, since they're disagreeing. As you say, there is the "reading of the text", and yes, it probably needs the CJEU.

Yeah, unfortunately when there is a dispute in how the law should be read, it goes to the courts. I will say that Apple is at a massive disadvantage even if it's possible for them to win in court because I don't know exactly how the CJEU does things, but generally here in America, there is some debate in judicial philosophies between whether you follow the text, the text and nothing but the text of the law, if you follow the text and the original intent of Congress at the time that they wrote the text, or if you read into the intent of the text and what the text was trying to accomplish.

As far as original intent goes, the EC wrote it, and very recently. There won't be much of a debate if it comes down to that, but if the CJEU is inclined to go straight to the text and question the parties on that, Apple might actually have a decent shot at beating the EU in court, but then theoretically the EC can just rewrite the law and try again and there really isn't anyone that could stop them so… yeah.

Post reply on HN