Let's not kid ourselves … this is all about protecting Spotify.
Spotify has been tugging on mommy's sleeve for quite some time, and this is the EU/EC political response.
So … who is the EC protecting?
The EC has a long history of protecting EU consumers and EU companies … and that's all they seem to care about.
The artists who compose and make the music that Spotify is based on? They can go pound sand.
Spotify pays the lowest royalties in the business, and has actually sued the artists for asking for a bigger cut of the pie. So the content creators - the ones who make the music which is at the core of the streaming business - get no protection from those capitalizing on their work.
If they wanted to, the EC could come up with regulations to protect the artists and establish a minimum payment for steamed music back to the artists - but the EC doesn't care about them. They're just the creatives: the force behind the whole business.
As long as the consumers get cheap music and Spotify can distribute it at minimum wage, the EC is happy.
And that, my friends, is why the EU countries have dropped from the European Center of intellectual property development into an also ran block of bureaucratically connected counties.
There is no longer any respect for the rights of the creators.
Apple should permanently replace iOS/iPadOS/macOS with vanilla Linux on all devices sold in the EU (Macs, iPhones, etc.), and then the EU won't be able to complain about Apple's OS's anymore. There would be no more App Store, or Apple software, or Apple services available on those phones. But EU users could install anything they want to install.
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
Right now Bing is trying to make me change my browser to Edge before I can access their new Chat GPT service. Do you really want to deal with that sort of hassles when dealing with services that are external to the Apple App store? I sure don't. That sort of thing would never be required if you buy things in the Apple App store. If you ask me, what Microsoft is doing now with GPT is truly anti-competitive, but nobody is complaining about that.
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
Can you just research yourself? I am an Apple user but trust me if Best Buy have a sale or any other shop I will get my Apple product there. I have a few subscriptions mostly entertainment apps all of them are directly with the merchants and then use the email/password to login using the app. Besides the offers developers will put through those links may not even be the best deal for you. It’s the best deal for them but not for you the tiny poor consumer. These developers aka “little guys” fighting Apple are billionaires and millionaires trying to enrich themselves even more by not paying Apple any commission and also by getting more money from these “direct deals” with consumers.
EU: A different option you say, user security, a profiting business model and a delightful experience? We'll have none of that! If it ain't broken, fix it
As a UK citizen I am so relieved we left the ghastly EU. They overreach on everything they do - it’s almost as if they are trying to prove to all other countries that they are the dominant force in world affairs.
Enjoy your shrinking economy (as one of the few countries) and your empty supermarket shelves 🤣
Apple should threaten to leave the EU marketplace if this nonsense doesn't end. The EU doesn't deserve nice things.
Apple isn’t going anywhere. If they don’t leave Russia, China or an Israel then why on Earth would they leave the EU. It’s one the most stable, richest and biggest markets on the planet. And its legislation is rock solid.
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
If you were looking at Dyson vacuums at Target, would you expect to see a message printed on the box that says, "This same Dyson is much cheaper at Costco; you can go buy it there!" Target would never allow that. Should the law require them to?
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
If you were looking at Dyson vacuums at Target, would you expect to see a message printed on the box that says, "This same Dyson is much cheaper at Costco; you can go buy it there!" Target would never allow that. Should the law require them to?
If you were driving a car made by Target that automatically drove you only to Target every time you tried to buy something, it might be a good idea to require them to do so, depending upon local laws.
Apple should threaten to leave the EU marketplace if this nonsense doesn't end. The EU doesn't deserve nice things.
Apple isn’t going anywhere. If they don’t leave Russia, China or an Israel then why on Earth would they leave the EU. It’s one the most stable, richest and biggest markets on the planet. And its legislation is rock solid.
They've left Russia, because they were legally required to do so.
It’s coming, Apple should build a EU iPhone just for Europe you get pure Apple, no store, no other programs, other than the base Apple, programs in short a lock down phone, who would buy it anyone who cares about their privacy.
Europe just represents 23% of the iPhone sold in the world and because of currency exchanges that percentage probably is going to go down in the future.
Let Europe have the base iPhone half of that 23% would buy such a phone, I know I certainly would buy one other than the base programs that Apple offers I use at most a dozen programs beyond what Apple offers.
At this point in history, Apple can offer 3000 curated programs beyond their base programs and no one would miss most of the other garbage that is usually put on to a smartphone.
Steve Jobs first instinct was right. The only app you get other than the base programs, is a web app.
Apple should threaten to leave the EU marketplace if this nonsense doesn't end. The EU doesn't deserve nice things.
Apple isn’t going anywhere. If they don’t leave Russia, China or an Israel then why on Earth would they leave the EU. It’s one the most stable, richest and biggest markets on the planet. And its legislation is rock solid.
I think Apple left Russia a week after the invasion last year.
Apple should threaten to leave the EU marketplace if this nonsense doesn't end. The EU doesn't deserve nice things.
Apple isn’t going anywhere. If they don’t leave Russia, China or an Israel then why on Earth would they leave the EU. It’s one the most stable, richest and biggest markets on the planet. And its legislation is rock solid.
They've left Russia, because they were legally required to do so.
They were not legally required to - they left because it was the right thing to do.
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
I seem to recall there was also a provision in the IAP/App Store rules at one time that the price offered outside the App Store couldn’t be lower than the price in the App Store - part of the so called anti-steering provisions. These may have been challenged and abolished now but I’m pretty sure they did exist at one point.
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
If you were looking at Dyson vacuums at Target, would you expect to see a message printed on the box that says, "This same Dyson is much cheaper at Costco; you can go buy it there!" Target would never allow that. Should the law require them to?
For Target, It's much worse than that. It's more like Dyson can put their vacuums on Target shelves at no cost, advertise on the packaging that the the same vacuum is available on Dyson web site at a lower cost and when you pay for it on their web site, you can go to Target to take one off the shelve and walk out of Target. And this can be done on your mobile phone, while still in Target.
Common business sense say that Target should not allow for this, but then a government pass a law that arbitrarily determines that Target is a "gatekeeper' and it would be anti-competitive of them if they did not allow for this.
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
If you were looking at Dyson vacuums at Target, would you expect to see a message printed on the box that says, "This same Dyson is much cheaper at Costco; you can go buy it there!" Target would never allow that. Should the law require them to?
If you were driving a car made by Target that automatically drove you only to Target every time you tried to buy something, it might be a good idea to require them to do so, depending upon local laws.
But who is forcing you to drive a car made by Target?
I have to say I agree that Apple’s ban on any mention of purchases or accounts outside the App Store does harm Apple users.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
If you were looking at Dyson vacuums at Target, would you expect to see a message printed on the box that says, "This same Dyson is much cheaper at Costco; you can go buy it there!" Target would never allow that. Should the law require them to?
If you were driving a car made by Target that automatically drove you only to Target every time you tried to buy something, it might be a good idea to require them to do so, depending upon local laws.
But who is forcing you to drive a car made by Target?
I live near an ANG base. Since the 70s it was home to A-10 aircraft. In the mid-00s the A-10s moved out and F-15s moved in. Every few years people who live very close to the airport become vocal about the noise from the aircraft and try to force some sort of change. I never understand how someone who knowingly bought a home next to an existing, noisy airport feels they have the right to demand change about that noise. If you don’t want to live next to a noisy airport, don’t buy a house next to a noisy airport.
This is a big can of worms that will crush online buyers and companies. If Apple is required to allow companies to use their platforms to promote products that they don’t profit from without their consent, any company with a product offered online can demand that ability. Like Walmart partnering with brands to promote their lower prices on Target’s website. That’s just a dumb idea. There will be a lot of handwringing because this opens up their physical stores to a similar scenario.
Comments
Spotify has been tugging on mommy's sleeve for quite some time, and this is the EU/EC political response.
So … who is the EC protecting?
The EC has a long history of protecting EU consumers and EU companies … and that's all they seem to care about.
The artists who compose and make the music that Spotify is based on? They can go pound sand.
Spotify pays the lowest royalties in the business, and has actually sued the artists for asking for a bigger cut of the pie. So the content creators - the ones who make the music which is at the core of the streaming business - get no protection from those capitalizing on their work.
If they wanted to, the EC could come up with regulations to protect the artists and establish a minimum payment for steamed music back to the artists - but the EC doesn't care about them. They're just the creatives: the force behind the whole business.
As long as the consumers get cheap music and Spotify can distribute it at minimum wage, the EC is happy.
And that, my friends, is why the EU countries have dropped from the European Center of intellectual property development into an also ran block of bureaucratically connected counties.
There is no longer any respect for the rights of the creators.
As an Apple user wouldn’t you want to know if there is a cheaper option available before making an in-app purchase? I know I do!
If it ain't broken, fix it
Don't worry: after you destroy your business with this "logic", you can still run for Congress as a Tr*mper.
Europe just represents 23% of the iPhone sold in the world and because of currency exchanges that percentage probably is going to go down in the future.
Let Europe have the base iPhone half of that 23% would buy such a phone, I know I certainly would buy one other than the base programs that Apple offers I use at most a dozen programs beyond what Apple offers.
At this point in history, Apple can offer 3000 curated programs beyond their base programs and no one would miss most of the other garbage that is usually put on to a smartphone.
Steve Jobs first instinct was right. The only app you get other than the base programs, is a web app.
But who is forcing you to drive a car made by Target?