Nearly twenty five years ago, the DoJ nearly split Microsoft into two companies due to them abusing their position as an ecosystem gatekeeper. How did we go from that to the point where apple (or google even), acting both as gatekeeper and direct competitor, can dictate how another company can communicate things to its end users/customers?
Why does this even require an antitrust probe? Why aren't there just clear laws against this stuff that Apple would never have done this in the first place, especially in the US where Apple is based?<p>If I'm reading it correctly, the problem is that Apple Music and Spotify compete, but Apple Music gets preferential treatment, because:<p>- Apple Music allows you to subscribe from within the app, and Apple isn't taking some % cut in the App Store from its own apps<p>- Spotify can't afford to pay a % cut to the App Store, so not only do Spotify subscribers encounter a hurdle (can't pay from within the app), but Apple doesn't even <i>allow</i> Spotify to provide users with a link to pay on the website from within the app<p>This is quite obviously completely unfair. But it seems like there aren't really laws <i>directly</i> against this thing. These investigations and court cases seem to be relying on other statutes around antitrust, anticompetitive behavior, etc., that aren't always clear.<p>But today, app stores and platforms and marketplaces are a common thing, where Amazon sells its own products on Amazon, Apple sells is own apps on the App Store, Google lists its own websites on Search.<p>Why isn't there incredibly specific and detailed legislation to prevent companies from favoring their own products in stores/platforms/marketplaces specifically? Why are we relying on outdated legislation that companies think there's a good chance won't apply to them if taken to court?<p>In other words, why don't we have clear laws that would have prevented Apple from ever considering this self-preferential behavior in the first place? This seems like such a no-brainer for legislators. It doesn't even seem like a Republican thing or a Democrat thing where the other side would oppose it -- it just seems like a common-sense thing.
Apple appears to be following a trajectory reminiscent of Microsoft's pre-Satya Nadella era.<p>Apple’s myopic focus on safeguarding its only growing revenue stream, the App Store, coupled with hubris in its dealings with developers and an abrasive approach toward regulators, suggests potential challenges ahead.<p>The optimism surrounding Tim Cook as the savior of Apple may be subject to reconsideration, as his tenure may not be remembered favorably. Under his leadership, Apple has seemingly become a crack head, getting high on the App Store revenue.
> “The App Store has helped Spotify become the top music streaming service across Europe and we hope the European Commission will end its pursuit of a complaint that has no merit.”<p>Meanwhile, millions of developers helped the App Store become the top app store across the globe.
I think the EU has really hit the jackpot with Apple, Google, and the like. It's not that these big players don't deserve a slap on the wrist; it's more about how long the EU waited to act and the deafening silence before now.<p>Remember the Microsoft antitrust drama in 2001? [1] That saga said more about the political games than anything to do with Microsoft breaking the rules. It feels like today's crackdowns on the tech giants are more about putting on a show than enforcing the law fairly.<p>I'm just hoping the EU doesn't decide we need another annoying pop-up or something. We've got enough of those already.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...</a>.
I always wonder what happens with these fines. Does it get absorbed into the EU budget? Does it go to the customers/citizens who were disadvantaged? Or does it go schools or the disadvantaged?<p>Does Apple actually pay or does this end an endless court cases and thereby the fine is absorbed by the lawyers?
For perspective:<p>Last quarter, Apple had ~$120,000,000,000 in revenue. Or about $1,300,000,000 revenue per day. As I write this, the story has a '6 hours ago' HN timestamp. And Apple's revenue has almost equaled the fine since the story was posted.<p>OK, but what about profit? Apple had $93,000,000,000 net revenue in 2023. Or about $250,000,000 per day. So the fine is about two days profit. Or around 0.5% of annual profit.
What’s strange is that this wasn’t a rule imposed just against Apple’s competitors. This rule applies to all apps on the store. The idea that they feel justified in imposing a fine specific to the music streaming apps seems like they’re hiding the ball a bit.
This just seems like even more nonsense from the EU to generate money for themselves.<p>What is the problem? I'm an Apple user on all my devices and I use Spotify for my music streaming without any issue from Apple.<p>This seems somewhat unfair to Apple to me. It's not like they block Spotify, it's very easy to install, subscribe and use on Apple devices and everyone knows Spotify and that it exists, of course Apple are going to promote there own streaming service, that is just normal business. I don't buy a sandwich at a cafe and then have them try and offer me a drink for the cafe next door as another choice.
500m is nothing except further incentive for them to continue doing what they are doing because this is pennies for them to do business.<p>Not sure why this is even newsworthy. Anything less than 5 billion is kind of pointless.
It's quite shocking what appears to be the common ground here.<p>The EU has been trying to give users (YOU!) freedom of choice when it comes to YOUR personal data. But you are complaining that businesses tried to circumvent this with cookie banners?<p>In this case the EU is trying to make sure there is COMPETITION, which benefits YOU. Capitalism, Free Markets, etc. Not a fan?<p>And coming up next: The EU is trying to make sure that YOU are allowed to install any application you want on a device YOU own. Again, a device YOU own, not Apple.<p>And this time around, Apple is going pure evil on this, by trying to force application stores offering open source (isn't this supposed to be a thing here, you know, HACKER news?) to pay them for allowing YOU to download a free open source app onto the device YOU OWN. Are you guys again going to defend them for that move?<p>Apple has absolutely no legitimate reason for all of this. Not by any commonly known definition of the term "free market".<p>There is so much shit going on here in my region (Central EU). There is a lot to complain about when it comes to the EU. But complaining about a governmental entity fighting for the rights of the people instead of the oligarchs for a change?<p>Seriously, what's wrong with some of you guys? Do you really want to live in a world where a tiny number of mega corporations, some of them run by lunatics, are allowed to have full control over devices you own AND all of your personal data?<p>I am SO looking forward to the EU smashing Apple to pieces for the disgusting stunt they are right now trying to prevent users getting back some control over their hardware.<p>I would assume that a US-based hacker/nerd/tech enthusiast would respond to what the EU is trying to achieve here with: "Hey, why can't we over here also have some of that? Is it normal that OUR government is not fighting for our basic rights?".<p>Sorry for the harsh words, but this really needed to be said. Some people really need a reality check and look at this site's title. No, it's not "i-want-musk-to-rule-the-world-and-eat-my-firstborn.com".
I would like to say that this is an unmeaningful amount of money for the people at Apple since they will make that in a couple of afternoons, and I wouldn't exactly be wrong, but I also know that these same petty people take this as a personal affront and will do their utmost to fight it, and be passive agressively patronizing about it.
Two things that are simultaneously true-<p>-The EU has a really liberal policy of meting out massive fines to US companies, seemingly seeing them as free money<p>-Apple is abusive, greedy and entitled and desperately <i>needs</i> to be checked. Apple's hubris (like "don't tell customers they can pay significantly less outside of the app") can only be defended by the Stockholm syndrome few who have deluded themselves into thinking this is rational or justified. It is plainly evident that Apple operates their actual app store team as a discount, rag-tag minimalist operation doing the absolute least possible, yet that yields a profit for them <i>greater than the entire Citibank conglomerate</i>. Just insane. Apple's take from the industry as rent-seeking is greater than entire industries, and we still pretend that it's some need.<p>There is zero justification for the no-value rent-seeking Apple commits in the app store. And if you have loads of Apple devices in your world like me, seeing Apple saturate markets and start to have trouble growing their already insane profits should cause you some concern as now is when they're going to look to lean on their rent-seeking and "service" income sources more than ever.
If EU's fines are based in global revenue percentage, then they shouldn't be the one collecting all the fines. If they act as a global messiah, they should distribute the fines and not use it for their own politics.
I'd like to see the EU fine companies based on the harm done worldwide, not just in the EU. But then allow Apple to decide to redirect some of that fine proportionally to over countries regulators (and if the other country doesn't want to take it, it is still owed to the EU).<p>I think that would help level the playing field, where some (smaller) countries can be walked over by big tech companies because the country is incapable of flighting big companies.