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

591–600 of 635 posts

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#591

Post by judge2020 »

troupo wrote: post #548
tantalor wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the ads you are consenting to, its the personal data collection and targeting. You could have non-personalized, or contextual ads. But those are much less effective.

> You could have non-personalized, or contextual ads. But those are much less effective. This is a lie that has been perpetuated for a very long time. 1. There's no definite proof they are much less effective 2. Even if they are less effective, is it a bad trade-off when weighed against life-long pervasive and invasive tracking?

> 2. Even if they are less effective, is it a bad trade-off when weighed against life-long pervasive and invasive tracking?

You're talking benefits to society and/or the consumer; the only thing that matters is (often short-term) profits.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#592

Post by fidotron »

alxlaz wrote: post #574
fidotron wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Ivan the Terrible of metaphor goes for the deflection!

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#593

Post by immibis »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #557
immibis wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of them are close to 30 billion!!!

Your profit is whatever your revenue minus costs. Plenty of app stores have operated in the red that we know this isn’t trivial to get right. It definitely is nowhere near negligible as patent asserted. I’m frustrated by how dumb HN is getting lately.

You are trying to tell me that all of that stuff combined makes up more than a small fraction of $30 billion per year.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#594

Post by troupo »

judge2020 wrote: post #591
troupo wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could have non-personalized, or contextual ads. But those are much less effective. This is a lie that has been perpetuated for a very long time. 1. There's no definite proof they are much less effective 2. Even if they are less effective, is it a bad trade-off when weighed against life-long pervasive and invasive tracking?

> 2. Even if they are less effective, is it a bad trade-off when weighed against life-long pervasive and invasive tracking? You're talking benefits to society and/or the consumer; the only thing that matters is (often short-term) profits.

"Yes the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders."

Sadly, this comic lives rent-free in my head all the time

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#595

Post by Yeul »

cruzcampo wrote: post #489
mrangle wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has its act together. Those, who are not Apple, do not in comparison. They are Big Mad that Apple does. You don't understand the term "rent seeking". Because in this case, it's Apple's competitors that are rent seeking by utilizing the force of the government to make Apple give competitors access to its private but non-monopolistic ecosystem. I think that Apple should call that bluff and leave the EU. Which in…

Dude the force of government is us, democratically voting, in a free society. Either respect our law, or don't do business here.

Amen. This American hatred for the government is very tiresome.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#596

Post by recursive »

masklinn wrote: post #549
recursive wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> show signs of rent seeking They've been hard rent-seeking since iTunes and iPod. They aggressively eliminated and made inconvenient other ways for getting music onto iPods. Hardware was great, but hard dependence on iTunes killed it for me.

Requiring dedicated software available for free is not rent seeking, there is no rent, and it was not exactly rare in the more lifestyle pmp space.

What if that software is trying to sell you stuff? And what if it's discouraging or preventing by technical means alternatives from that?

What do people do with ipods if not play music? And where do they get that music if not paying Apple? Apple's official recommendation at the time if you wanted to ingest arbitrary audio like your own recordings was to burn a CD and then rip it with iTunes. That cost about a dollar an hour to get access to your own audio rather than just... making a reasonable process.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#597

Post by tantalor »

tossandthrow wrote: post #551
tantalor wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extortion is a stretch. Nobody is being forced to use these services.

One of they key points of DNA is exactly that you likely can not avoid these services. Keeo in mind, it is only the largest 7 tech companies in the world that has to comply. It is incredibly few companies.

s/DNA/DMA/

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#598

Post by EasyMark »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #530
immibis wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I knew what coca cola was and it kept it in my mind because SC was drinking it as opposed to pepsi or tab

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#599

Post by zamadatix »

simondotau wrote: post #581
zamadatix wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU's regulatory stance on antitrust does not require a monopoly, it requires a dominant position in a market meeting use of certain criteria marked as abuse. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... From there when they tell a company they are breaching criteria for abuse and the company doesn't change the EU issues according fines. As for "why" this is against the law, I assume that more t…

But Apple doesn't have a dominant position in the EU.

They do, in several areas, at least according to the definitions of EU law. This may not meet your individual definition of dominant position of course (e.g., one might hold you need 50% market share in certain markets to be dominant, but the EU definition does not hold this requirement).

They also meet the definitions of a gatekeeper (as defined by the DMA) in several areas, which is the related law this fine actually came from.

Re: Apple and Meta fined millions for breaching EU law

#600

Post by zamadatix »

simondotau wrote: post #580
madeofpalk wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 g…

Ignoring at first whether limiting distribution license terms actually relates to abandoning IP rights outright, the local government is the one who defines what rights businesses operating in their jurisdiction have. This, however, does not actually give the EU the ability to force Apple to do anything, as you insist. Apple is able pull out of the market if they feel the market's regulations are too heavy handed, at which point they no longer need to comply with local law. What the foreign company would like to enforce only layers on under the restrictions of local law, not above it.

As for IP license rights over all other law, I think most people are in alignment with a circumstance basis (or, more succinctly, "local law has priority" basis). E.g. most are indeed happy to declare a software license claiming women are not allowed to distribute the software is invalid in the jurisdiction - a company's "IP rights" be damned over a person's human rights, as an example.

Post reply on HN