EU accuses Apple of breaking antitrust laws with Apple Pay [u]
The European Union has has objected to how Apple denies other firms use of the same iPhone technology that drives Apple Pay.
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
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
Comments
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…
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you’re a dev, shouldn’t you know that?
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.
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.”
Either way, that is not the point here. It's about choice, competition and a level playing field.
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.
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.
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.)
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.