EU accuses Apple of breaking antitrust laws with Apple Pay [u]

Posted:
in iOS edited May 2
The European Union has has objected to how Apple denies other firms use of the same iPhone technology that drives Apple Pay.

Credit: Apple
Credit: Apple


As predicted, the EU has issued what it calls a preliminary view over Apple's control of the NFC contactless payment technology used by Apple Pay in the iPhone.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the European Commission has issued a statement of objections. It says that Apple restricts competition in the mobile-wallets market, and that its preventing developers from using the technology was done to benefit its own Apple Pay solution.

The statement of objections has been issued to Apple in writing. Following this preliminary view, a fuller investigation is continuing. Should the final investigation concur with this early report, Apple could potentially face fines of up to 10% of its global turnover.

"We designed Apple Pay to provide an easy and secure way for users to digitally present their existing payment cards and for banks and other financial institutions to offer contactless payments for their customers," an Apple spokesperson told AppleInsider. "Apple Pay is only one of many options available to European consumers for making payments, and has ensured equal access to NFC while setting industry-leading standards for privacy and security."

"We will continue to engage with the Commission," continued the spokesperson, " to ensure European consumers have access to the payment option of their choice in a safe and secure environment."

Apple further claims that while it is working to ensure it engages with the European Commission, it is concerned to keep what it describes as Apple Pay's high security. The company says that Apple Pay is markedly more secure and free of fraud than the third-party apps on Android.

As to the point of denying other companies access, Apple argues that Apple Pay is designed to provide equal access to all banks and financial institutions.

Updated May 2, 10:05 ET: Added Apple's response to the preliminary ruling.

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 28
    aderutteraderutter Posts: 534member
    It’s ridiculous that the EU want to stifle innovation and try to dictate what technology companies - especially ones that don’t have a monopoly - can invent and use. Does every invention by every company have to be open to use by all other companies? This is nonsensical puerile government gone mad.

    How long has this “mobile wallets market” being a “thing”? I’d argue it’s not even a relevant “thing” for antitrust - it’s not like you will die if you can’t have access to a mobile wallet. 

    If a fridge manufacturer adds payment processing on their white goods for ordering groceries will the EU insist that they allow all other companies to use their tech? No, only if it’s big-tech as they want their cash. Money-grabbing hypocrites is what they are.

    I guess Apple will have to disable Apple-Pay for the EU and hike product costs to cover any fine that might happen. It’s not like people will stop buying iPhones if the prices go up… 
    bshankradarthekattdknoxLeoMCwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 28
    Scottle9Scottle9 Posts: 2unconfirmed, member
    The Apple control over the ecosystem is actually what makes it work well and work safely and is the foundational reason for why people buy Apple products whether they realise it or not.

    To rip it apart will surely make it another G00gle product? To do so would surely cost $millions to rewrite the code that makes it work?

    So if the EU leadership don’t like the Apple ecosystem as their representatives don’t seem to then they should use alternative products, they already have that choice and those other products are already available.
    iOS_Guy80bshanktdknoxwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 28
    Dead_PoolDead_Pool Posts: 87member
    Imagine if you required an automaker to allow third parties to write the software controlling the engine. 
    Scottle9iOS_Guy80bshanktdknoxred oakwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 28
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    Dead_Pool said:
    Imagine if you required an automaker to allow third parties to write the software controlling the engine. 
    That line of thinking has literally nothing to do with what is happening here. 

    https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_2764

    This is about competition and access to standarised equipment (NFC). 

    It is only a preliminary step and not a final judgment. That is made perfectly clear in my link above. 
    iOS_Guy80muthuk_vanalingamctt_zh
  • Reply 5 of 28
    teejay2012teejay2012 Posts: 305member
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 28
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    There are plenty of innovative EU companies and plenty of unicorns too but what good is it to be innovative and want to offer a wallet solution if the platform where you could deploy it reserves the NFC hardware for itself and in doing so limits competition. 

    You say you are against being forced to use 'their' solution by a company yet that is exactly what Apple is on the hook for here.

    crowleyctt_zh
  • Reply 7 of 28
    darelrexdarelrex Posts: 95member
    avon b7 said:
    ... 
    ...

    This is about competition and access to standarised equipment (NFC).

    ...
    Not sure what Apple will do in response to this, but maybe they should mention that NFC is just a standardized way for a mobile device to communicate wirelessly with a very-close-by retail point-of-sale terminal. There's nothing in the NFC standard that requires any particular mobile device to participate in any particular third-party bank, credit card, mobile wallet, or whatever.

    Apple's just using NFC the way it wants to — and following the NFC standard so well that CVS and RiteAid had to shut down NFC completely on all their registers just to block Apple Pay (back when their CurrentC obligations required them to do so).
    bshanktdknoxtmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 28
    teejay2012teejay2012 Posts: 305member
    avon b7 said:
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    There are plenty of innovative EU companies and plenty of unicorns too but what good is it to be innovative and want to offer a wallet solution if the platform where you could deploy it reserves the NFC hardware for itself and in doing so limits competition. 

    You say you are against being forced to use 'their' solution by a company yet that is exactly what Apple is on the hook for here.

    While some of what you say may have merit, I worry about the potential risk to security opening access to NFC on iPhones. I would like to hear from experts on this as this has a higher priority for me than allowing some EU startup a piece of the pie.  I would stress that not everything the European Commission presents has merits. Personally I believe that Margrethe Vestager may have a vendetta against Apple ever since her disastrous Irish Apple tax case was thrown out.





    bshankwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 28
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 5,990member
    avon b7 said:
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    There are plenty of innovative EU companies and plenty of unicorns too but what good is it to be innovative and want to offer a wallet solution if the platform where you could deploy it reserves the NFC hardware for itself and in doing so limits competition. 

    You say you are against being forced to use 'their' solution by a company yet that is exactly what Apple is on the hook for here.

    Irrelevant.  iPhone is a toaster.  A sealed end-to-end solution.  Developers and banks are not Apple's customers.  People that buy iPhones are Apple's customers, and most of us buy into Apple's ecosystem because Apple is the gatekeeper.  There is choice and competition already, but folks like you continuously tip-toe over it.  You want that kind of openness - as usual - BUY AN ANDROID PHONE!

    Only a vocal, loud, whining minority are raising a stink and they are not customers.  They are corporations, and sketchy developers that want to ride the coattails of Apple's work.  They know that there is no money to be made on Android, and iPhone users is where the money is at.  It's not about "competition".  NFC does not "require" that everyone have access to that technology on every product.  

    Get over yourself.
    bshankmike1charlesatlasdarelrextdknoxrundhvidgeorgie01tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 28
    bshankbshank Posts: 248member
    The EU needs to focus on their energy crisis for Christ sake! They are absurd
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 28
    ericthehalfbeeericthehalfbee Posts: 4,381member
    Sope-on-a-rope still spouting his usual bullshit.

    Why no antitrust case against the banks that refuse to add their cards to Apple Pay? They are reducing my personal security regarding payments by not allowing me to use Apple Pay. This is the same as a bank saying we only allow our cards to work on certain payment terminals. If a store uses that terminal then you can’t use your card there.

    As to the companies that think they have a right to access iPhone hardware/software for their own use, I have a question. Should I be allowed to create a bank card that duplicates normal bank cards but adds extra security features? After all, I’m just making something compatible with the banks own card. Banks should have any issue with someone making “compatible” cards that use the number I already have assigned to me.


    We know why this is happening. The EU is targeting the Big 5 US tech companies because their own tech industry is a failure. So instead of passing laws that affect everyone equally (targeting a specific behavior) they’re making oddly worded rules that only affect the Big Five but carefully avoid their own home-grown companies.
    LeoMCwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 28
    croprcropr Posts: 1,078member
    sflocal said:
    avon b7 said:
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    There are plenty of innovative EU companies and plenty of unicorns too but what good is it to be innovative and want to offer a wallet solution if the platform where you could deploy it reserves the NFC hardware for itself and in doing so limits competition. 

    You say you are against being forced to use 'their' solution by a company yet that is exactly what Apple is on the hook for here.

    Irrelevant.  iPhone is a toaster.  A sealed end-to-end solution.  Developers and banks are not Apple's customers.  People that buy iPhones are Apple's customers, and most of us buy into Apple's ecosystem because Apple is the gatekeeper.  There is choice and competition already, but folks like you continuously tip-toe over it.  You want that kind of openness - as usual - BUY AN ANDROID PHONE!

    Only a vocal, loud, whining minority are raising a stink and they are not customers.  They are corporations, and sketchy developers that want to ride the coattails of Apple's work.  They know that there is no money to be made on Android, and iPhone users is where the money is at.  It's not about "competition".  NFC does not "require" that everyone have access to that technology on every product.  

    Get over yourself.
    You may assume that only the end users are the customers of Apple, but that is not how Apple sees it (looking at the efforts to sell iPhone/iPad/macs to the enterprise), not how the EU sees it and not how the app developers see it.

    The EU want a competitive playing field, so that app developers  can compete on merit and continue to innovate.  Apple is not the sole provider of innovation and of security.  The EU wants Apple to open access to the NFC chip.  This has nothing to do with security as Apple claims.  The NFC protocol is standardized. Apple allows connection to NFC for mass transit solutions but not for banking solutions; there is no logical reason for this but anti-competitive behavior.

    With the exception of games apps, there is little money to be made by app developers on IOS alone or on Android alone.    App developers cannot neglect a large portion of the potential customer base (iOS or Android).  I am an non game app developer and making an app available on both platforms costs me only 30% more than making it single platform, with about 80% more revenue. 
    muthuk_vanalingamctt_zhspherictdknox
  • Reply 13 of 28
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,921member
    Does the EU know technology? It’s apparent they don’t. Having more people with access to your information is inherently less secure. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 28
    cropr said:
    sflocal said:
    avon b7 said:
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    There are plenty of innovative EU companies and plenty of unicorns too but what good is it to be innovative and want to offer a wallet solution if the platform where you could deploy it reserves the NFC hardware for itself and in doing so limits competition. 

    You say you are against being forced to use 'their' solution by a company yet that is exactly what Apple is on the hook for here.

    Irrelevant.  iPhone is a toaster.  A sealed end-to-end solution.  Developers and banks are not Apple's customers.  People that buy iPhones are Apple's customers, and most of us buy into Apple's ecosystem because Apple is the gatekeeper.  There is choice and competition already, but folks like you continuously tip-toe over it.  You want that kind of openness - as usual - BUY AN ANDROID PHONE!

    Only a vocal, loud, whining minority are raising a stink and they are not customers.  They are corporations, and sketchy developers that want to ride the coattails of Apple's work.  They know that there is no money to be made on Android, and iPhone users is where the money is at.  It's not about "competition".  NFC does not "require" that everyone have access to that technology on every product.  

    Get over yourself.
    You may assume that only the end users are the customers of Apple, but that is not how Apple sees it (looking at the efforts to sell iPhone/iPad/macs to the enterprise), not how the EU sees it and not how the app developers see it.

    The EU want a competitive playing field, so that app developers  can compete on merit and continue to innovate.  Apple is not the sole provider of innovation and of security.  The EU wants Apple to open access to the NFC chip.  This has nothing to do with security as Apple claims.  The NFC protocol is standardized. Apple allows connection to NFC for mass transit solutions but not for banking solutions; there is no logical reason for this but anti-competitive behavior.

    With the exception of games apps, there is little money to be made by app developers on IOS alone or on Android alone.    App developers cannot neglect a large portion of the potential customer base (iOS or Android).  I am an non game app developer and making an app available on both platforms costs me only 30% more than making it single platform, with about 80% more revenue. 
    Near as I can tell, the Express Transit card system is part of Apple Pay/Wallet. Mass transit apps do not directly access the NFC system. See here: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/apple_pay_on_the_web/applepaysession/1778000-canmakepaymentswithactivecard and here for starters https://developer.apple.com/documentation/passkit/pksuicapassproperties/2545177-transitbalance/

    If you’re a dev, shouldn’t you know that?
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 28
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    cropr said:
    sflocal said:
    avon b7 said:
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    There are plenty of innovative EU companies and plenty of unicorns too but what good is it to be innovative and want to offer a wallet solution if the platform where you could deploy it reserves the NFC hardware for itself and in doing so limits competition. 

    You say you are against being forced to use 'their' solution by a company yet that is exactly what Apple is on the hook for here.

    Irrelevant.  iPhone is a toaster.  A sealed end-to-end solution.  Developers and banks are not Apple's customers.  People that buy iPhones are Apple's customers, and most of us buy into Apple's ecosystem because Apple is the gatekeeper.  There is choice and competition already, but folks like you continuously tip-toe over it.  You want that kind of openness - as usual - BUY AN ANDROID PHONE!

    Only a vocal, loud, whining minority are raising a stink and they are not customers.  They are corporations, and sketchy developers that want to ride the coattails of Apple's work.  They know that there is no money to be made on Android, and iPhone users is where the money is at.  It's not about "competition".  NFC does not "require" that everyone have access to that technology on every product.  

    Get over yourself.
    You may assume that only the end users are the customers of Apple, but that is not how Apple sees it (looking at the efforts to sell iPhone/iPad/macs to the enterprise), not how the EU sees it and not how the app developers see it.

    The EU want a competitive playing field, so that app developers  can compete on merit and continue to innovate.  Apple is not the sole provider of innovation and of security.  The EU wants Apple to open access to the NFC chip.  This has nothing to do with security as Apple claims.  The NFC protocol is standardized. Apple allows connection to NFC for mass transit solutions but not for banking solutions; there is no logical reason for this but anti-competitive behavior.

    With the exception of games apps, there is little money to be made by app developers on IOS alone or on Android alone.    App developers cannot neglect a large portion of the potential customer base (iOS or Android).  I am an non game app developer and making an app available on both platforms costs me only 30% more than making it single platform, with about 80% more revenue. 
    Near as I can tell, the Express Transit card system is part of Apple Pay/Wallet. Mass transit apps do not directly access the NFC system. See here: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/apple_pay_on_the_web/applepaysession/1778000-canmakepaymentswithactivecard and here for starters https://developer.apple.com/documentation/passkit/pksuicapassproperties/2545177-transitbalance/

    If you’re a dev, shouldn’t you know that?
    He didn't say apps needed direct access to it. 

    Ever since OSX, direct access to hardware was not officially allowed. At the start everything had to go through kernel extensions. iOS is based on the same foundation as MacOS so I would think the same direct access is also not allowed. 


  • Reply 16 of 28
    avon b7 said:
    Dead_Pool said:
    Imagine if you required an automaker to allow third parties to write the software controlling the engine. 
    That line of thinking has literally nothing to do with what is happening here. 

    https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_2764

    This is about competition and access to standarised equipment (NFC). 

    It is only a preliminary step and not a final judgment. That is made perfectly clear in my link above. 
    Wrong. There’s been plenty of litigation over just that issue — automakers have fought third parties and car owners over who has the right to modify or tune the software in cars for decades. The hardware is pretty standardized. 

    There is no right to access “standardized” equipment for any entity in any jurisdiction — that’s typically handled by licensing, and whether or not it’s offered as an open system (hence FRAND).

    In this case, it’s a closed system, and the EU trying to is force a private company to open it to third parties — a principle which they definitely don’t follow in a equitable manner across all sectors. Protectionist provisions abound in the EU, so it’s absolutely bs that they’re “pro competition.” 
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 28
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    jungmark said:
    Does the EU know technology? It’s apparent they don’t. Having more people with access to your information is inherently less secure. 
    What information are you referring to?

    Either way, that is not the point here. It's about choice, competition and a level playing field. 
  • Reply 18 of 28
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    sflocal said:
    avon b7 said:
    Apple Pay will remain my payment system regardless. I changed banks when first introduced because 'my' bank was slow to bring it on, as it considered how much it would cost it, rather than how much I would like it. I would change again if any bank forced me to use 'their' method. Earlier as many companies tried to get into the NFC payment systems, it was clear that what they really wanted is to track us and less so the small additional cost to Apple. No thanks... banks. Opening the NFC to others may be a security issue, I have read. I do not understand what it is with EU regulatory bodies on this and the App Store. The EU is ahead of the world on privacy regulations yet seem to target US companies for thin rationales that turn out to not have legal merit aka Irish tax ruling in 2020. If I was cynical, I would say this is about money from fines and trying to level the competition field for non innovative EU companies.
    There are plenty of innovative EU companies and plenty of unicorns too but what good is it to be innovative and want to offer a wallet solution if the platform where you could deploy it reserves the NFC hardware for itself and in doing so limits competition. 

    You say you are against being forced to use 'their' solution by a company yet that is exactly what Apple is on the hook for here.

    Irrelevant.  iPhone is a toaster.  A sealed end-to-end solution.  Developers and banks are not Apple's customers.  People that buy iPhones are Apple's customers, and most of us buy into Apple's ecosystem because Apple is the gatekeeper.  There is choice and competition already, but folks like you continuously tip-toe over it.  You want that kind of openness - as usual - BUY AN ANDROID PHONE!

    Only a vocal, loud, whining minority are raising a stink and they are not customers.  They are corporations, and sketchy developers that want to ride the coattails of Apple's work.  They know that there is no money to be made on Android, and iPhone users is where the money is at.  It's not about "competition".  NFC does not "require" that everyone have access to that technology on every product.  

    Get over yourself.
    Now, there is a strange take on Apple and its customers. 

    Those customers depend on apps and therefore developers. 

    Apple depends on apps too, and therefore developers. 

    Banks and corporations create apps. 

    By definition that makes the iPhone environment NOT sealed. It utterly depends on the outside world. Apps! 

    In that world, and within the confines of the EU specifically, there are rules and regulations that must be observed. 
    edited May 2 gatorguy
  • Reply 19 of 28
    avon b7 said:
    jungmark said:
    Does the EU know technology? It’s apparent they don’t. Having more people with access to your information is inherently less secure. 
    What information are you referring to?

    Either way, that is not the point here. It's about choice, competition and a level playing field. 
    Choice and competition come from other device and OS makers. That’s your level playing field. Throwing those words around like slogans is meaningless in an environment where they’re selectively enforced for the benefit of entrenched and influential interests. It’s exactly like the endemic green-washing perpetrated by companies. Competitors in weaker positions have weaponized these terms to gain unfair, unearned  advantages.

    Does the EU force Philips to make Hue systems interoperable with competitor’s systems? Do they open the control software and hardware for direct access by competitors? Nope. They have licensees that work through Philip’s APIs and their hardware has to meet pretty stiff requirements.

    Does the EU get involved on customers behalf while Nestle privatizes or steals public water through tactics that would make organized crime proud? Nope. Because the EU isn’t actually interested in what’s best for people, but in maintaining it’s power and authority. If the cost of that is half-decent social systems so that people don’t look to closely at what those in power are actually up to, they’ll do that. It doesn’t make them more pro-people than any other system. 

    There should be limits to what governments can dictate in terms of competition i.e. you shouldn’t be able to legislate a company’s competitive advantages out of existence.

    All of the EU’s efforts have been targeted toward bringing the market down to the lowest common denominator, not up to the best possible solution. That’s anticompetitive on the face of it, and that practice is what mired the mobile space for decades under the control of rent-seeking European companies that failed to innovate, and prevented the entire market from moving forward in any significant way.

    This is all very plainly protectionism for the EU’s corrupt financial institutions and it’s own entrenched corporate influence.

    I’d hazard a guess that part of the issue is that so many executives and employees of mobile companies that no longer exist because of competition from Apple (and to a lesser extent Google) are now in regulatory positions that enable them to grind their personal axes.

    Sorry for the diatribe, but I’m kinda sick of people drinking the EU Kool-Aid, taking their stated motivation at face-value, and not considering what similar efforts have done to hobble actual competition and choice. (For example, people like to cite the breakup of Ma Bell as a pro-competitive “good thing”, without examining the significant downsides it introduced, how it reduced actual competition in regional markets, the adverse effects it had on employees, and how it led directly to the telecommunications mess we have today.)



    georgie01
  • Reply 20 of 28
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member
    avon b7 said:
    jungmark said:
    Does the EU know technology? It’s apparent they don’t. Having more people with access to your information is inherently less secure. 
    What information are you referring to?

    Either way, that is not the point here. It's about choice, competition and a level playing field. 
    Choice and competition come from other device and OS makers. That’s your level playing field. Throwing those words around like slogans is meaningless in an environment where they’re selectively enforced for the benefit of entrenched and influential interests. It’s exactly like the endemic green-washing perpetrated by companies. Competitors in weaker positions have weaponized these terms to gain unfair, unearned  advantages.

    Does the EU force Philips to make Hue systems interoperable with competitor’s systems? Do they open the control software and hardware for direct access by competitors? Nope. They have licensees that work through Philip’s APIs and their hardware has to meet pretty stiff requirements.

    Does the EU get involved on customers behalf while Nestle privatizes or steals public water through tactics that would make organized crime proud? Nope. Because the EU isn’t actually interested in what’s best for people, but in maintaining it’s power and authority. If the cost of that is half-decent social systems so that people don’t look to closely at what those in power are actually up to, they’ll do that. It doesn’t make them more pro-people than any other system. 

    There should be limits to what governments can dictate in terms of competition i.e. you shouldn’t be able to legislate a company’s competitive advantages out of existence.

    All of the EU’s efforts have been targeted toward bringing the market down to the lowest common denominator, not up to the best possible solution. That’s anticompetitive on the face of it, and that practice is what mired the mobile space for decades under the control of rent-seeking European companies that failed to innovate, and prevented the entire market from moving forward in any significant way.

    This is all very plainly protectionism for the EU’s corrupt financial institutions and it’s own entrenched corporate influence.

    I’d hazard a guess that part of the issue is that so many executives and employees of mobile companies that no longer exist because of competition from Apple (and to a lesser extent Google) are now in regulatory positions that enable them to grind their personal axes.

    Sorry for the diatribe, but I’m kinda sick of people drinking the EU Kool-Aid, taking their stated motivation at face-value, and not considering what similar efforts have done to hobble actual competition and choice. (For example, people like to cite the breakup of Ma Bell as a pro-competitive “good thing”, without examining the significant downsides it introduced, how it reduced actual competition in regional markets, the adverse effects it had on employees, and how it led directly to the telecommunications mess we have today.)



    One word: gatekeeper. 

    The EU has detailed exactly why it is treating gatekeepers like they do. 

    You can argue about how gatekeeper criteria were cooked up but not how the EU is dealing with this.

    Philips Hue is not a gatekeeper. 
    gatorguy
Sign In or Register to comment.