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

Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

9to5mac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 411 posts

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#331

Post by nemo44x »

abtinf wrote: post #3

In English law, is there a clearly defined, well understood, written standard of “fair”?

The UK doesn’t even have a single sourced constitution. Just random things from random times in random documents. Parliament is essentially king and can just make any law it wants at anytime with a basic majority. Nothing is codified. There are no real standards.

The UK is one of the most arbitrarily defined places in terms of law. It’s why they can have and enforce a 2-tier system. “Stirring things up” is literally a charge a judge can arbitrarily rule on. Place is hilarious.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#332

Post by amelius »

AlchemistCamp wrote: post #329
amelius wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? If a shoplifter steals from one shop, the judge will not take into consideration all the shops they didn't steal from.

Charging devs a percentage App Store sales is very different from shoplifting and equating the two is extremely misleading. Devs voluntarily choose to publish apps on the App Store and doing so gets them both another discovery channel and a low-friction sales channel. Stores being robbed by shoplifters don't voluntarily enter that arrangement and they get no benefit from it.

Look I'm not going to say the analogy is perfect. No analogy ever is.

But at a fundamental level, they are breaking the law to extract money from people. You may not call that stealing, but imho it's not a huge stretch of reality.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#333

Post by pacifika »

londons_explore wrote: post #279
pacifika wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine the response if the uk tried to break up apple

I'd love it if a government would decide that the hardware side of the company needs to split from the software side. Suddenly we could buy macos to run in a VM. Or we could buy iPhones running android.

Or split Apple UK off. And then fine them.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#334

Post by Yeul »

worble wrote: post #311
vladvasiliu wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In which situation does the end user not pay for everything? Even a fine or a tax on a company ends rolled up in the price paid by the end user. Same thing with programs paid for by the government. It’s the taxpayers who foot the bill. I’m kinda split on the whole Apple situation. I’m firmly in the camp of “monopoly bad”, but apparently people are fine with apple’s practices. It’s not like they have to buy an iPhone.

> It’s not like they have to buy an iPhone. I'm so sick of hearing this, the current smartphone market is an american megacorp duopoly, both of whom are locking down their phones to such a degree that you cannot even claim you own the hardware anymore. There is essentially no choice. And not buying a smartphone is not a choice either, if you want to actually exist in the modern world.

Google is still held back by the fact that their Pixel line isn't selling. They can't dictate terms to Samsung or Xiaomi. Apple owns the hardware and software.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#335

Post by immibis »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #297
immibis wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? In feudalism, kings control everything. In capitalism, investors control everything. It's what the system is named after - kinda hard to miss.

Investors don't control Apple, the CEO of Apple does. The investors are random people holding shares of it in their 401k. The company being so big is also they reason they can't control it effectively, because the people holding it are so diffuse that they have significant coordination costs.

The investors with effective voting rights are not usually people with retirement funds, but rather the administrators of those retirement fund pools.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#336

Post by impossiblefork »

immibis wrote: post #291
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine the response if the uk tried to break up apple This right here is why they need to be broken up. Are we supposed to have a company more powerful than a country?

Yes? In feudalism, kings control everything. In capitalism, investors control everything. It's what the system is named after - kinda hard to miss.

Yes, but capitalism is just a name for the bad thing. We don't actually say that we have capitalism, if we did we would basically be saying 'capital ownership by some to the exclusion of others is good actually' and that isn't compatible with having society.

You say things like 'free markets are wonderful and efficient and we don't believe that they lead to the kind of outcomes that people who have come up with terms like "capitalism" believe they will'.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#337

Post by matheusmoreira »

immibis wrote: post #291
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine the response if the uk tried to break up apple This right here is why they need to be broken up. Are we supposed to have a company more powerful than a country?

Yes? In feudalism, kings control everything. In capitalism, investors control everything. It's what the system is named after - kinda hard to miss.

This is feudalism. Technofeudalism, to be precise. Corporations have created digital fiefdoms and reduced us all to serfs.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#338

Post by sehansen »

nandomrumber wrote: post #185
echelon wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Being on the side of the consumer means being on the side of the free market. An unregulated market leads to monopoly and anti-competitive practices. Capitalism is one of the best models we've discovered, but its markets must be appropriately regulated. Capitalism should be difficult. An eternal treadmill. You shouldn't be able to wedge yourself into a market as a quarter-century long hegemon. You shouldn't be able…

I’m not convinced the solution to anything is government picking winners, nor telling other people what they, the government themselves, are going to do with their, the people / companies, money. And how to I get support for the products I just bought when your government regulators terminate the existing of the product developer / manufacturer.

What other mechanism can there exist that would have the power to change the behaviour of these giant corporations, except government?

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#339

Post by sehansen »

gpm wrote: post #47
cedws wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You had the choice to buy another phone.

I did not have a choice to buy another equivalent phone because patents legally forbid other companies from producing equivalent phones. If Apple wants to take that defence, they should be required to have abandoned every patent they own on iPhones prior to my purchase of the device.

I don't think you're entitled to an equivalent phone. If we're talking patents on essential things like a cryptographic algorithm required for banking or a technology required to implement 5G, sure, the patent holder should be required to license the patent to anyone at a reasonable price. But not licensing patents on non-essential features like Face ID or health monitors are OK. And all of that is independent of whether or not you can install your own software.

What matters is the competitive situation. Given that you're practically required to have either a Google or Apple device to participate normally in modern society, Apple and Google should be precluded from forcing customers and suppliers[0] to use their other services, like payment services, app stores, delivery networks, ad networks, etc.

But if Apple were the 4th biggest phone platform with at most 10% of the market, Apple would definitely be entitled to remain a walled garden. Even if their phones had features no-one else can implement due to patents.[1]

0: E.g. app developers

1: I'd claim this is the only position that is consistent with being in favor of patents. But I'm mildly anti-patent, so YMMV.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#340

Post by archerx »

wkat4242 wrote: post #296
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find headlines like this much more appropriate when placed in terms of days of revenue: "Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near 2 days of revenue!" I feel like fines aren't even an appropriate remedy for this. They're both inherently arbitrary and not something that actually fixes it. And that combination gives governments a perverse incentive, because they get $2B to put in their own pockets…

You can't jail a company. And breaking one up is pretty much impossible considering the geopolitical pressures on huge companies like this.

You can jail decision makers that work in the company. You can also jail the CEO, if they are ready to accept those big salaries they should also be ready to accept consequences.
Post reply on HN