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

France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 217 posts

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#191

Post by johnnyanmac »

briandear wrote: post #119
ohgr wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. If they really gave a shit they'd be getting Apple to open up their APIs so we can get data out of Reminders and Notes etc without having to resort to necromancy and hacking... Apple need one of these https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/

As an Apple user, I don’t want third party apps to be able to have access to that data. Apple has earned my trust, but most third party apps have not. I buy Apple specifically because I want the level of privacy that their platform provides. If third party devs don’t like it, they can ship for Android.

Funny, they burned that trust for many by being so opaque on every level of their pipeline, from consumers to developers, from hardware to software.

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#192

Post by johnnyanmac »

pertymcpert wrote: post #104
microtonal wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what is going on here, right? The complaint is that the consent process is much harder for third-party apps than Apple apps and Apple cannot give itself advantages because Apple is a gatekeeper w.r.t iOS. A simple yes-no for third-party applications makes it easier for the user to reject tracking and doesn't make the process more cluttered than for Apple apps.

Where did you get that part from? > Third-party publishers "cannot rely on the ATT framework to comply with their legal obligations," so they "must continue to use their own consent collection solution," the French agency said. "The result is that multiple consent pop-ups are displayed, making the use of third-party applications in the iOS environment excessively complex." It's not harder at all. France are just mad…

The part where you said

>Third-party publishers "cannot rely on the ATT framework to comply with their legal obligation

Yeah, as apple loves to do, rules for thee but not for me.

>France are just mad that their small advertisers have to ask for permission again

Because Apple's isn't good enough, but in apple fashion you must use it (but they dont). Yeah, anti-competitive.

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#194

Post by johnnyanmac »

epolanski wrote: post #147
lvl155 wrote: post #87

At this point, I am convinced EU fines American tech companies for fun.

And you're wrong. That being said in that specific case this is odd because in general: - EU (albeit not France) gives plenty of time to OS developers to adapt and often talks to them directly when they are as big as Apple - The timing makes it look like with a different less disruptive administration it would've went differently In any case US companies abusing any possible loophole for paying pennies for decades in…

It still surprises me how far the US has declined in pretty much all qualities of life. But Hacker News still has this sect of a community that despite EU regulations. Ones they crave from American governments.

Like, do we want protections from corporations or to continue to let them stomp on using hopes they become the corporation one day?

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#195

Post by johnnyanmac »

bberenberg wrote: post #19
9283409232 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is referring to Apple's first party apps so no they aren't third party. I can understand why someone would make that argument but the French regulator argument here is that in the spirit of competition, third-parties should have the same barrier to entry as Apple's first party apps and I can see the argument they are making.

I feel like if the apps have their own tracking then yes one click makes sense. If they include third party then multi consent also makes sense. They’re not contradictory points.

And most can't. It's an absurdly high barrier to interest and thus uncompetitive. That's what the ruling is based on. Most of us can't just whip up our own tracking network just to save on one click.

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#196

Post by johnnyanmac »

pertymcpert wrote: post #172
epolanski wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue here is that Apple only needs one click to sell your data (and yes they do it, they made 11B $ on ads last year) and others need two. In fact Apple is making more and more money on ads because they limit data access to third parties, but still sell yours in search and store.

No, the issue in the article is that 3rd parties feel they need additional consent. That's on them if they choose to do it.

Yes, to comply with regulations. Because apple's forced solution isn't enough. So it's apple's fault.

This is just more an extension of the DMA lolly gagging they are doing where there's a clear solution that Apple takes its sweet time strolling towards.

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#197

Post by Swenrekcah »

ralfd wrote: post #186
Swenrekcah wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a European Apple user I welcome any and all fines that can be levied on Apple for their anticompetitive practices.

As a European Apple user I want politicians and bureaucrats leave the company alone! They are not a monopoly, they never will be and won't have Microsofts 90% desktop market share, so let the damn market sort it out.

The market does not work unless the rules of fair play are enforced, just like any other endeavour of humanity from sports to politics.

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#198

Post by johnnyanmac »

briandear wrote: post #110

Perhaps they should fine the companies that want to do such intrusive tracking? Apple’s not sharing data with third parties for their internal stuff, that’s a big difference when Dominos wants to share with someone that isn’t Dominos.

>Apple’s not sharing data with third parties for their internal stuff

Yes, they do.

>Apple does not sell your personal data including as “sale” is defined in Nevada and California. Apple also does not “share” your personal data as that term is defined in California.

From their privacy policy (C. 1/31/2025) It's enough to comply for a definition under a single state in a single country. They make a billion off ads so I'm sure they loophole the heck out of that.

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#199

Post by johnnyanmac »

dmitrygr wrote: post #7

"We will not tell you how to fix what we found to be 'wrong', reserve the right to find your fixes 'wrong' again, and will charge you more" At which point do we admit that this is simply extortion?

Meanwhile, if they gave a specific solution

"at what point do we admit that the EU is strongarming US tech to their will"?

You can't win here.

Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking

#200

Post by abduhl »

overfeed wrote: post #174
abduhl wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What mechanism can the regulators use to prevent potential dumpers from entering a market? Setting price controls on the entire economy? What if the market is currently beholden to a decentralized monopoly with artificially high prices? [see taxis and the arguments people made for Uber’s existence despite it being an obvious dumping operation] The more proactive approach requires an omniscient regulator that you hope…

> What mechanism can the regulators use to prevent potential dumpers from entering a market? The legal system, including the discovery process, and basic accounting to calculate when the selling price is lower than BoM cost. Now it's your turn to answer my earlier question.

> The legal system, including the discovery process, and basic accounting to calculate when the selling price is lower than BoM cost.

So price controls is your answer? The Costco rotisserie chicken is illegal monopolization in your world.

> What mechanism can the regulators use to prevent competition going out of business while maintaining the artificially low prices?

The legal system, including the equitable power to split up companies under antitrust law.

There is a reason that the proactive approach has been roundly rejected by courts in the modern day, despite Lina Khan’s best efforts to push it. Despite your comment earlier about preserving competition being “easy” (preserving competition via regulation is never easy) and preserving low costs being “hard” and on “shakier legal footing,” the test for antitrust remains consumer harm, not competition.

Post reply on HN