Your cars touchscreen is not a marketplace. The M in DMA is for markets, which is what the regulation targets. Now if your car manufacturer sold the car and someone else sold the touchscreen then you could talk about this but as it stands its a false equivalence. Apple has a market within iOS over which it can arbitrarily enforce anti-competitive rules, the EU regulates this type of behaviour.
Yes, my point is that this regulation shouldn't exist in the first place. Don't like the iPhone, don't buy the iPhone!
It is the definition of rent. The cost is that I have to run your software on my device. I could create value for myself by running software of my choice, instead Apple destroys that value to create a percentage of it for themselves. Apple pretends to value user privacy and artist rights as these values often conveniently align with taking away user and partner control. The mask has slipped multiple times but their c…
> It is the definition of rent. In no sense of “rent”, or “definition”. > The cost is that I have to run your software on my device. I could create value for myself by running software of my choice This is an outright Orwellian redefinition of the term. > Apple pretends to value user privacy and artist rights as these values often conveniently align with taking away user and partner control. The mask has slipped mult…
lol, you did quite some redefining yourself. They do the things the the parent said. They do the same thing with activation lock. Putting it all under the idea of protecting against theft, but it's real motive is to minimize after market parts.
Facebook being a monopoly is irrelevant to EU competition laws. These laws are strictly interested in fostering competitive markets and broadly cares about all sorts of anticompetitive behaviours. They are in no way interested in monopolies and I don’t think being a monopoly is a prerequisite for any of them. The closest notion will be dominant position but that’s a far weaker criteria itself irrelevant to the DMA.
Setting aside the DMA and DSA entirely as I already explained to someone else earlier why the DMA wasn’t an antimonopoly law and I don’t want these newer laws to get in the way of my questions: put another way, the EU does not have an antimonopoly law on the books? Article 102 of the TFEU seems to back that up, but I’m understanding you correctly here, the EU just doesn’t have an antimonopoly law? So before I start t…
I don’t understand your first paragraph.
The EU has competition law (like the USA to be honest). Competition law is a lot broader than simply being against monopoly which is why I don’t understand why you mention monopolies. Monopolies are an extreme form of disfunction in competitive markets. There are a lot of emphasis on market dominance in the EU law which is itself a concept broader than monopolies. A monopoly is necessary a dominant player so would fall under all the provision of article 102, yes.
Setting aside the DMA and DSA entirely as I already explained to someone else earlier why the DMA wasn’t an antimonopoly law and I don’t want these newer laws to get in the way of my questions: put another way, the EU does not have an antimonopoly law on the books? Article 102 of the TFEU seems to back that up, but I’m understanding you correctly here, the EU just doesn’t have an antimonopoly law? So before I start t…
I don’t understand your first paragraph. The EU has competition law (like the USA to be honest). Competition law is a lot broader than simply being against monopoly which is why I don’t understand why you mention monopolies. Monopolies are an extreme form of disfunction in competitive markets. There are a lot of emphasis on market dominance in the EU law which is itself a concept broader than monopolies. A monopoly i…
Fair enough. So in that way the EU does have an antimonopoly law, it’s just covered by a broader category that happens to encompass monopolies.
US officials and businessmen keep on repeating the same thing: > The European Commission is attempting to handicap successful American businesses while allowing Chinese and European companies to operate under different standards. But this is wildly untrue. The EU isn't hand-picking individual organisations and fining them because they're American, they're fining them because they're in breach of existing legislation.…
I mean I understand they are doing, but also why aren't they fining European and Chinese companies for the same thing?
Because the only non-US app/marketplace big enough to be affected by the DMA is tiktok.
US officials and businessmen keep on repeating the same thing: > The European Commission is attempting to handicap successful American businesses while allowing Chinese and European companies to operate under different standards. But this is wildly untrue. The EU isn't hand-picking individual organisations and fining them because they're American, they're fining them because they're in breach of existing legislation.…
> But this is wildly untrue. The EU isn't hand-picking individual organisations and fining them because they're American, they're fining them because they're in breach of existing legislation. The same legislation applies to local companies. The iPhone App store existed before this legislation, and I suspect the rest of the targetted things did too. This legislation only applies to companies that have a certain marke…
Which EU company do you feel should be included in the list? Considering that one of the main criteria is the ability to abuse monopolies.
US officials and businessmen keep on repeating the same thing: > The European Commission is attempting to handicap successful American businesses while allowing Chinese and European companies to operate under different standards. But this is wildly untrue. The EU isn't hand-picking individual organisations and fining them because they're American, they're fining them because they're in breach of existing legislation.…
I think you make many good points. Slight tangent: Why isn't EU more concerned about TikTok? While it is very difficult to prove, various studies have demonstrated that TikTok pushes more content favoring the Chinese Government (CCP).
If the EU were to worry about foreign propaganda then that would hit the US far harder than China
Apple does compete on its own merits. Its merits are that it built and controls the operating system and hardware that people choose to buy. If other companies have an issue, then they can build their own software, their own hardware, and compete.
Companies don’t make laws (unless you live somewhere like the US); people do. If the people say “stop fucking around and rent-seeking” then companies should have to do that. It’s pretty simple, really. Just because you build your own hardware and software doesn’t give you the right to do whatever you want.
Gibberish. Also, you don't know what "rent seeking" means.
Apple does compete on its own merits. Its merits are that it built and controls the operating system and hardware that people choose to buy. If other companies have an issue, then they can build their own software, their own hardware, and compete.
I bet the Robber Barons said something like “Don’t like it? Build your own railway!” too.
A computer and phone company, in a sea of computer and phone companies, is not equivalent to a rail company.
Apple does compete on its own merits. Its merits are that it built and controls the operating system and hardware that people choose to buy. If other companies have an issue, then they can build their own software, their own hardware, and compete.
Apple is free to leave the European market if it doesn’t like the rules.