EU companies are complaining that US big tech is ignoring a new antitrust law

AppleInsider

European media and technology companies have signed a letter stating that tech giants such as Apple, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft have neglected their obligations to comply with the EU's Digital Markets Act.

European Union flags

Those who have signed the letter express concerns that tech giants aren't "engaging in a dialog with third parties or have presented solutions falling short of compliance" with the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA).

The signatories "urge the European Commission and the European Parliament to use all within their power to ensure that the gatekeepers comply with both the letter and spirit of the DMA, starting from 7 March 2024."

Currently, 24 companies that have signed the letter, according to CNBC, including:

• Adevinta


• Allegro


• Billiger.de


• Ceneo


• CompareGroup


• Ecosia


• Element


• Favi


• Heureka Group


• Idealo


• Kelkoo


• Ladenzeile


• Le Guide.com


• OLX


• Open-Xchange


• Panther Holding GmbH


• Preis.de


• Prisjakt


• Proton


• Qwant


• Runnea


• Schibsted


• Solute


• Vipps

The Digital Markets Act (DMA) of the European Union is a series of regulations aimed at big tech "gatekeepers." Any large company with a monthly total of 45 million active users in Europe and at least 75 billion euros ($80 billion) in market capitalization is labeled a "gatekeeper."

Currently, there are six companies labeled as gatekeepers, including Apple, Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and TikTok's parent company, Bytedance.

These laws aim to ensure fair competition by restricting the priority a company can give its own first-party services. Gatekeepers are expected to comply with the regulations by March 7. Failure to comply with the DMA rules could trigger an EU investigation, which might lead to "behavioral or structural remedies."

According to the DMA, companies that act as gatekeepers must ensure fair competition by providing equal opportunities to their competitors' products and services. This means that Apple, for instance, would have to allow third-party app stores and side-loading apps on iPhones. Additionally, Apple would be obliged to permit developers to use third-party payment systems instead of mandatorily using the one provided by Apple.

In November, Apple drafted an appeal against the DMA, arguing that it should not be required to allow alternative app marketplaces on its devices.

The Cupertino-based tech giant later accused the European Union of incorrectly assessing how many app stores it had -- clarifying that it has five app stores, not one.

In September, Apple received a temporary exemption from the DMA. The company claimed that its messaging service, iMessage, was not large enough to qualify as a gatekeeper service. EU regulators are now investigating whether the DMA applies to iMessage or not.



Read on AppleInsider

red oak

“Technology companies”  

Remarkable how far behind the EU has fallen behind 

tech_traveller

I find it gives me a tiny sliver of joy that Apple doesn't get a free pass in the EU like they do in the US.

I know it's wrong to think like that, but it feels so hilarious.

beowulfschmidt

"Big Company won't let me use the intellectual property, technology, and infrastructure they've spent millions of dollars and man-years developing for free" is not anti-trust, you fascist pukes.

jrg_uk

Never heard of any of those companies. Are they ad networks, per chance, or do they have other hustles?

Respite

jrg_uk said:

Never heard of any of those companies. Are they ad networks, per chance, or do they have other hustles?

I recognise a few of them, it's a pretty broad bunch of shopping, software, messaging, and media.  No ad networks that I recognise, though I'm fairly ignorant about such things. Adevinta sound like they're probably about that.

chasm

(Looks at calendar) is it March 7th already?

Oh wait, it’s not. One of the crybaby companies that signed this letter needs to explain more clearly how Big Tech companies can “ignore” a law that hasn’t come into force yet?

It sounds like they think this will “whittle” Apple, Microsoft, and Google down to their (local-only) level. NA GA HA PEN, gang.

This is a fairly bald-faced attempt to gain even MORE favouritism from the EU than they already have. While I think the GDPR was a great use the EU’s power that has benefitted users the world over, this DMA is going to have exactly the opposite effect: Euro tech companies will become even more isolated, and as we’re seeing from Apple, the Euro market will be increasingly “locked off” to have fewer services than the rest of the the world gets, and Euro tech companies are likely locking themselves IN to their (large but) limited market, instead of opening up opportunities worldwide.

bythenumbers918

I say malicious compliance. Release a special version called iPhoneEU, strip out all encryption, iMessage, browsing, and the app store. You have a basic phone with API's to build anything you want to put on it without anything related to iMessage, security, etc. Have fun EU.

baconstang

bythenumbers918 said:

I say malicious compliance. Release a special version called iPhoneEU, strip out all encryption, iMessage, browsing, and the app store. You have a basic phone with API's to build anything you want to put on it without anything related to iMessage, security, etc. Have fun EU.

That's what I was thinking.  Offer 2 versions of iOS.  One is open with side-loading and all and can save you money.  The other is secure and safe.  Let them choose.

command_f

If I side load an app onto my new iPhone, does that void the warranty?

Serious question: suppose I load some dreadfully (or maliciously) coded app that seeks to occupy all the processor cores at 100% all the time in the background. My battery then lasts for a much shorter time than Apple said it would, so I innocently claim I have a faulty phone. Or, I have to recharge it so frequently that it needs a new battery within the warranty period. There must be lots of examples, much more serious than this contrived example, where Apple would spend time offering support etc but be unable to help (‘cos they don’t know about the app I’m using). 

The monopoly on offering an App Store is a powerful position to have but, to me, Apple is using it responsibly and making my life on my phone easier and more secure. Shouldn’t the legislators be getting their heads around the possible abuses of this monopoly situation and outlawing them instead? Whilst the balance of benefit is to the user, why change it based on hypothetical abuse? I’m quite sure that I gain as it is, though there needs to be that motivation to the “gatekeepers” to continue innovating and adapting. 

omasou

Gatekeepers are expected to comply with the regulations by March 7. Failure to comply with the DMA rules could trigger an EU investigation, which might lead to "behavioral or structural remedies."

Why would any company proactively "engage in dialog"? The EU threatened the companies now the EU need to carry out their investigation(s) and spell out what the company violated and the recommended "behavioral or structural remedies." Doing that may generate some dialog.

Oh, wait an investigation costs money and months to conduct /s

timpetus

baconstang said:

bythenumbers918 said:

I say malicious compliance. Release a special version called iPhoneEU, strip out all encryption, iMessage, browsing, and the app store. You have a basic phone with API's to build anything you want to put on it without anything related to iMessage, security, etc. Have fun EU.

That's what I was thinking.  Offer 2 versions of iOS.  One is open with side-loading and all and can save you money.  The other is secure and safe.  Let them choose.

New for the EU: an iPhone that's as insecure as your unelected bureaucrats always wanted!

Have fun with that, guys. If the EU gov thinks it can innovate in tech, let them try competing in the private sector with their "great" ideas.