"Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security," said Apple. "We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety."
And then this:
"From previous statements including ones to AppleInsider, it's known that Apple has been continually working with the EU on its responses to the DMA, so it's reasonable to assume that will continue.
Leads to the question: Why even bother putting the subject into the public domain if communication and clarification are ongoing?
Far better to say as little as possible until things are clarified. All it takes is clarification and all for a roll out that isn't even planned for this year!
Basically FUD on Apple's part and Vestager has a valid point in her response to a question that wouldn't have been asked if it weren't for Apple.
Basically FUD on the part of EU-loving commenters. Apple has a right to provide whatever capabilities it wants to in whatever country/region it wants to. You're buying a product with certain features. There's nothing that says Apple has to provide the EU with everything it has the capability of including. The EU can demand Apple provide everything but that's not the way companies work. This is a brand new Apple capability and Apple has the right to provide it when they feel it's ready, not when a corrupt EU demands it. At this point, I feel Apple is well within its rights to start charging for features in countries it wants to. As far as I'm concerned, Apple should start charging for macOS, iOS, tvOS, iPadOS along with every Apple app and feature it wants to. I'd like to see the EU try and force Apple to provide everything for free. It isn't going to happen.
Vestager is not suggesting that Apple needs to deliver AI features to EU users. What she notes is that Apple's statement seems to imply they are not anxious to offer features where competition will be required. Not that it matters in the real world since Apple isn't rolling out some of those features this fall outside of the US and in English anyway, correct? If so, why did Apple say anything at all? My sense is it's a negotiating tactic.
Will Apple be able to freely promote and sell Apple Music within the Spotify app and website?
Well of course they can. I wasn't aware Apple had their own label music, but assume they do. If Apple wants to sell Apple Music content on Spotify per licensing requirements, what prevents it as long as they're willing to share part of the music revenue with Spotify? And If Spotify has their own labeled music catalog then they too could offer it within Apple Music in exchange for a cut of the revenue from it.
Not sure what you're talking about. Neither Apple or Spotify is a music label. Apple is being compelled to allow companies like Spotify to market and sell there service on Apple's platform with no compensation to Apple. How does this make sense.
So my hypothetical asked: Will Apple be permitted to advertise and sell their Apple Music service in Spotify's house, for free???
No doubt it would be fine in Spotify's App Store. If anyone wants to pay Apple directly rather than on the Spotify AppStore I don't think Spotify will block the way.
Point taken. Nice to see that the EC stays sharp as a knife against companies taking competition laws lightly.
if Apple won’t make Apple Intelligence aka OpenAI with an Apple layer, then users can still do without the layer
Can you explain, because Apple Intelligence doesn’t equal ChatGPT integration …
They trained their models to be capable to run on device to do very specific tasks, that costed a lot of money to create in the first place, they should give that all away + the users privacy as it is powerful in the personal space, no other LLM in the cloud has offered today? Read their blogpost at https://machinelearning.apple.com/research/introducing-apple-foundation-models … Apple Intelligence in Personal Context, the ChatGPT is for world knowledge questions …
I see a lot of people assume all AI is the same, here AI will work with your personal context. Just like Windows recall as soon that it was proven that content was accessible to anyone Microsoft postponed the release for obvious reasons, and if they want to make that secure, by the same logic they cannot release it in the EU …
"Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security," said Apple. "We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety."
And then this:
"From previous statements including ones to AppleInsider, it's known that Apple has been continually working with the EU on its responses to the DMA, so it's reasonable to assume that will continue.
Leads to the question: Why even bother putting the subject into the public domain if communication and clarification are ongoing?
Far better to say as little as possible until things are clarified. All it takes is clarification and all for a roll out that isn't even planned for this year!
Basically FUD on Apple's part and Vestager has a valid point in her response to a question that wouldn't have been asked if it weren't for Apple.
This isn't about clarification if the EU can simply choose to fine Apple even when Apple is following the law to a tee... which we've already seen the EU do with Apple. Apple communicating as to why the can't reasonably and safely include Apple Intelligence while the EU are playing games is about as far from FUD as you can get.
I've tried to avoid getting personal in this discussion, but she does often seem power drunk the way — both her words and her tone — she answers questions. And the answers always demonstrate a very personal hostility toward and an intention to bend to her personal will the companies she has decided to regulate. Almost like this has little to do with the companies and the realities of the marketplace and everything to do with a personal vendetta being carried out.
The bias is so obvious when Microsoft gets an anti-competitive investigation for its AI integration, and she insists because Apple isn't launching its AI integration they're anti-competitive too. She's damning two American companies for doing the opposite of each other, but both are guilty of the same thing evidently. She thinks she queen and she can dictate without explanation, way too drunk on power.
This talk about the EU attacking American companies is rather silly. The EU legislation is targeting the behaviour of mobile OS strategies and when it comes to mobile phones on sale in the world, who are by far the main suppliers of mobile operating systems and associated apps? Google and Apple . Any European companies? No. So the companies affected by definition will be American ones. They are not targeted because they are American but because the ones who between them probably control 99% of such OSs in the world are American.
If this legislation extends to PC OSs then it’s the same thing - Apple and Microsoft … who also happen to be American. Are any European OSs offered for sale to any degree on computers in the world? No.
It’s a bit of a persecution complex to see this from an “anti American” perspective as there are no EU companies against which to make a point of comparison.
This talk about the EU attacking American companies is rather silly.
It's not silly at all. They decided what companies would be "regulated" by drafting "goals" and "standards" that exempted all but the American companies. The "regulations", which seem more like the personal whim of the day than anything actually resembling regulations, are specifically targeted at whatever will result in less profit for Apple, Microsoft, et al. and more profit for EU companies like Spotify. (Vestager's words.) The "law" is only being "followed" if American companies take a financial hit and don't monetize their IP. Of course the EU is attacking Apple. There is no other way to view it based on Vestager's own public statements.
Frankly, all this whining from Euros about how Apple is being mean to them by not letting them have AI is more than a bit childish. Actions have consequences. You wanted the EU to crack down on Apple, et al., well, these are the consequences. You no longer get the latest tech. Too bad. Accept responsibility for your actions that have led to these consequences and stop crying about how unfair it is.
"Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security," said Apple. "We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety."
And then this:
"From previous statements including ones to AppleInsider, it's known that Apple has been continually working with the EU on its responses to the DMA, so it's reasonable to assume that will continue.
Leads to the question: Why even bother putting the subject into the public domain if communication and clarification are ongoing?
Far better to say as little as possible until things are clarified. All it takes is clarification and all for a roll out that isn't even planned for this year!
Basically FUD on Apple's part and Vestager has a valid point in her response to a question that wouldn't have been asked if it weren't for Apple.
This isn't about clarification if the EU can simply choose to fine Apple even when Apple is following the law to a tee... which we've already seen the EU do with Apple. Apple communicating as to why the can't reasonably and safely include Apple Intelligence while the EU are playing games is about as far from FUD as you can get.
It is about clarification and the EU can't simply choose to fine Apple.
If Apple is following the law to a tee I'd like to know how you reached that conclusion, especially seeing as the EU hasn't made anything public in terms of Apple Intelligence because Apple hasn't even brought it to the EU market.
Apple would have to do something. The EU would have to investigate it. A conclusion would have to be drawn and if necessary corrections or a fine imposed. From there on there is the appeals procedure.
If Apple is in fact following the laws to a tee it will be a stroll in the park for the company.
Your claim that the EU has already simply fined Apple is very shaky as it is in the middle of the process that I just outlined. Apple can (and surely is going to) appeal.
It's not shut up and pay up.
And that fine also included past anti-competitve behaviour.
Obviously things are nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to be implying.
We will simply have to wait and see things wind their way through the legal process.
Apple is simply complying with EU tules as the EU demands. Shrug. Being cautious is certainly warranted when the EU fines are so enormous. A percent of the global revenue? That’s very daunting.
"Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security," said Apple. "We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety."
And then this:
"From previous statements including ones to AppleInsider, it's known that Apple has been continually working with the EU on its responses to the DMA, so it's reasonable to assume that will continue.
Leads to the question: Why even bother putting the subject into the public domain if communication and clarification are ongoing?
Far better to say as little as possible until things are clarified. All it takes is clarification and all for a roll out that isn't even planned for this year!
Basically FUD on Apple's part and Vestager has a valid point in her response to a question that wouldn't have been asked if it weren't for Apple.
This isn't about clarification if the EU can simply choose to fine Apple even when Apple is following the law to a tee... which we've already seen the EU do with Apple. Apple communicating as to why the can't reasonably and safely include Apple Intelligence while the EU are playing games is about as far from FUD as you can get.
It is about clarification and the EU can't simply choose to fine Apple.
If Apple is following the law to a tee I'd like to know how you reached that conclusion, especially seeing as the EU hasn't made anything public in terms of Apple Intelligence because Apple hasn't even brought it to the EU market.
Apple would have to do something. The EU would have to investigate it. A conclusion would have to be drawn and if necessary corrections or a fine imposed. From there on there is the appeals procedure.
If Apple is in fact following the laws to a tee it will be a stroll in the park for the company.
Your claim that the EU has already simply fined Apple is very shaky as it is in the middle of the process that I just outlined. Apple can (and surely is going to) appeal.
It's not shut up and pay up.
And that fine also included past anti-competitve behaviour.
Obviously things are nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to be implying.
We will simply have to wait and see things wind their way through the legal process.
Oh please, stop pretending there are actually regulations to follow or that there is anything like due process at work. All we have here is biased "regulators" acting out personal vendettas with a kangaroo court appeals process. There is no "legal process", any more than Russia has "legal process" in their criminal system.
Every time I read one of these EU stories I try to think about what Apple should do to deal with this situation. It’s tempting to say Apple should just leave, but it doesn’t make sense to leave money on the table.
They won't be leaving money on the table by pulling out of the EU. First, the EU is just a fraction of what Apple classifies as "Europe" (which includes the Middle East and at least parts, if not all, of Africa), and obviously doesn't include European countries not in the EU, such as the UK and Switzerland. The fines the EU is threatening far eclipse the value of the EU as a market. Second, if EU rules force Apple to cripple, compromise or otherwise dumb down their products, that makes them less competitive in the rest of the world. There is at this point almost no upside for Apple to release anything in the EU and plenty of downside, not to mention all the resources wasted "negotiating" with EU bureaucrats who are not acting in good faith and are making up the rules as the go and changing them retroactively.
So, what exactly is the downside for Apple to simply pull out of the EU until there is a more favorable business climate there? I can't see any upside to staying at this point.
I’ve read that the EU represents about 7% of Apple’s revenues. That’s almost $30 billion a year. I see no reason to walk away from that if you don’t have to.
Note that my suggestion to create a subsidiary is meant to create EU-specific (lobotomized) versions of apple products to meet the needs of Eurocrats.
The question is — can Apple make money selling lobotomized products? Since everyone else also has to sell lobotomized products in the EU, it’s possible that they can. But if it turns out they can’t, then sure — leave. But I think it makes sense to try first.
Companies that don’t try to do hard things end up like IBM — slowly leaving every market that seems too hard to fight for.
Every time I read one of these EU stories I try to think about what Apple should do to deal with this situation. It’s tempting to say Apple should just leave, but it doesn’t make sense to leave money on the table.
They won't be leaving money on the table by pulling out of the EU. First, the EU is just a fraction of what Apple classifies as "Europe" (which includes the Middle East and at least parts, if not all, of Africa), and obviously doesn't include European countries not in the EU, such as the UK and Switzerland. The fines the EU is threatening far eclipse the value of the EU as a market. Second, if EU rules force Apple to cripple, compromise or otherwise dumb down their products, that makes them less competitive in the rest of the world. There is at this point almost no upside for Apple to release anything in the EU and plenty of downside, not to mention all the resources wasted "negotiating" with EU bureaucrats who are not acting in good faith and are making up the rules as the go and changing them retroactively.
So, what exactly is the downside for Apple to simply pull out of the EU until there is a more favorable business climate there? I can't see any upside to staying at this point.
I’ve read that the EU represents about 7% of Apple’s revenues. That’s almost $30 billion a year. I see no reason to walk away from that if you don’t have to.
I think it's less than that because Apple doesn't break out revenue for the EU as such, only "Europe" which includes the Middle East and Africa. Even actual Europe, you have to drop out revenue from non members of the EU like the UK and Switzerland.
But, even if it is 7%, if they are threatening you with fines of 10%, seems like a no brainer to drop that market. Why sell for a loss?
Every time I read one of these EU stories I try to think about what Apple should do to deal with this situation. It’s tempting to say Apple should just leave, but it doesn’t make sense to leave money on the table.
They won't be leaving money on the table by pulling out of the EU. First, the EU is just a fraction of what Apple classifies as "Europe" (which includes the Middle East and at least parts, if not all, of Africa), and obviously doesn't include European countries not in the EU, such as the UK and Switzerland. The fines the EU is threatening far eclipse the value of the EU as a market. Second, if EU rules force Apple to cripple, compromise or otherwise dumb down their products, that makes them less competitive in the rest of the world. There is at this point almost no upside for Apple to release anything in the EU and plenty of downside, not to mention all the resources wasted "negotiating" with EU bureaucrats who are not acting in good faith and are making up the rules as the go and changing them retroactively.
So, what exactly is the downside for Apple to simply pull out of the EU until there is a more favorable business climate there? I can't see any upside to staying at this point.
I’ve read that the EU represents about 7% of Apple’s revenues. That’s almost $30 billion a year. I see no reason to walk away from that if you don’t have to.
I think it's less than that because Apple doesn't break out revenue for the EU as such, only "Europe" which includes the Middle East and Africa. Even actual Europe, you have to drop out revenue from non members of the EU like the UK and Switzerland.
But, even if it is 7%, if they are threatening you with fines of 10%, seems like a no brainer to drop that market. Why sell for a loss?
The point is to avoid the fine by complying with the law. That is, I’m saying Apple should swallow their pride and sell the dumb products that the EC demands. It might be bad for consumers but that’s on the EC. And only sell the lobotomized product in the EU, obviously.
Let the baby have its bottle.
Unless it turns out to be impossible to please the baby, and then leave.
It’s also better from a PR perspective to let people see that it’s the EC that’s being unreasonable. How they handle this in Europe can affect laws and regulations elsewhere. Apple needs to be seen as the good guys, the EU as the bad guys, so that politicians in other countries conclude they don’t want to follow the EU example
avon b7 said: It's all completely unnecessary on Apple's part. Why not simply ask the EU and wait for a reply?
That's what they're doing: putting the new AI features on hold while they communicate with the EU per the DMA requirements. Note that Apple was in communication with the EU about the anti-steering changes in the DMA and now the EU is saying there's something wrong with what Apple did.
What was unnecessary was the need to make a fuss out of things. Totally unnecessary.
If they had simply asked and waited for a reply we wouldn't even be talking about this now. No one would have brought the question up in the first place. Vestager wouldn't have said anything.
But no, Apple decided to FUD things up.
That's their call but it's pretty foolish, petty and probably won't help in the bigger scheme of things.
Apple’s going for friction so... so be it.
It is absolutely hilarious to me that random retired people in Spain believe themselves in a position to claim the security position of engineers and product owners of the actual software are simply spreading FUD.
Comments
It’s a bit of a persecution complex to see this from an “anti American” perspective as there are no EU companies against which to make a point of comparison.
"The EU Strikes Back"
If Apple is following the law to a tee I'd like to know how you reached that conclusion, especially seeing as the EU hasn't made anything public in terms of Apple Intelligence because Apple hasn't even brought it to the EU market.
Apple would have to do something. The EU would have to investigate it. A conclusion would have to be drawn and if necessary corrections or a fine imposed. From there on there is the appeals procedure.
If Apple is in fact following the laws to a tee it will be a stroll in the park for the company.
Your claim that the EU has already simply fined Apple is very shaky as it is in the middle of the process that I just outlined. Apple can (and surely is going to) appeal.
It's not shut up and pay up.
And that fine also included past anti-competitve behaviour.
Obviously things are nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to be implying.
We will simply have to wait and see things wind their way through the legal process.
Apple: “Ok.” (doesn’t release)
EU fanboys: “You can’t do that! Come back here, mister!”
…lol. Sorry dudes, you can’t *make* a company release the products or features you want. This is still a private business, not a state-run entity.
But, even if it is 7%, if they are threatening you with fines of 10%, seems like a no brainer to drop that market. Why sell for a loss?
The Dunning-Krueger effect is strong!