“Something as nebulous as "spirit" isn't law because laws must clearly state what they mean. How can anyone know if they are following the law, or breaking it, if the laws is so ill defined as to depend entirely on the "interpretation" that regulators choose to give it.”
.
Thats a bit rich coming from an American. How much time is spent “interpreting” your constitution because it wasn’t clearly stated what your lawmakers meant.
Yes, and these "interpretations" have sometimes caused us no end of trouble, like Dred Scott and the recent decision creating out of thin air Presidential immunity.
No shit. If you're not prepared to re-write your laws in a way that make sense, why on earth do you expect other others to do so.
The DMA isn't an extortion racket. It's a way of protecting EU members from companies that are taking advantage of their market position and abusing it. Is it perfect. No. Is it needed, absolutely. If the EU stopped doing everything that Americans don't understand they would not be able to enact a single law.
Alternatively we could look to ban those abusers entirely. Or force the sale of the company to EU owners. But that all sounds a little authoritarian to me.
Sorry, but if it weren't an extortion racket they would publish actual regulations that tell companies like Apple precisely what compliance consists of. Do they do that? No, they don't, they just "find" that whatever these companies, with no concrete guidance at all on what is expected, did do "wasn't sufficient". Classic racket.
Sorry, but if it weren't an extortion racket they would publish actual regulations that tell companies like Apple precisely what compliance consists of. Do they do that? No, they don't, they just "find" that whatever these companies, with no concrete guidance at all on what is expected, did do "wasn't sufficient". Classic racket.
The regulations are clear. Others manage to comply. Just because you don’t understand them, it doesn’t mean they are not sufficient. Apple didn’t comply, but tried their best to circumnavigate them. Classic monopoly abusing their power.
I happen to like the monopoly and am more than happy with a closed ecosystem that protects my privacy and security. But the regulations clearly say that Apple, as a gatekeeper, is required to allow for the distribution of apps on its iOS operating system by means other than through the Apple App. Apple doesn’t sufficiently do this with conditions it imposes on developers. Fine fully justified. Apple has the right to appeal.
You are in a glass house throwing stones. Trump is trying to extort the entire world with his “reciprocal” tariffs and until you can elect someone with basic common sense you don’t have a leg to stand on.
I will just say to those of you cheerleading the EU on this that what you are actually cheerleading is the undermining of the rule of law. And what's going on with EU regulators "enforcing" the DMA erodes the rule of law in a way that is entirely insidious and perhaps even more dangerous than what's going on in the US right now. It doesn't matter what the regulators intentions are, they have created and are part of a process that so corrupts the notion of law as to render it meaningless.
This so-called "law" known as the DMA, and the regulatory bodies "enforcing" it, is not actually law at all. What it is is a purported "legal" framework that erodes the very concept of law in a way that leads to lawlessness. Much is talked about the "spirit of the law" in regard to the DMA, but that's not how law works. Law works according to the letter of the law, and anything that depends on "spirit" is not actually law.
Something as nebulous as "spirit" isn't law because laws must clearly state what they mean. How can anyone know if they are following the law, or breaking it, if the laws is so ill defined as to depend entirely on the "interpretation" that regulators choose to give it. Even in announcing these fines against Apple, they haven't said exactly how Apple "violated" the law, nor exactly how they could be in compliance. Instead there is hand waving verbiage that states Apple hasn't done enough and isn't in compliance, but nothing at all on what compliance would actually look like. How could anyone know if they are compliant if they don't know what compliance is? It's like posting a sign, "Speed Limit", with no indication of what that limit is but telling motorists that they must follow the spirit of the speed limit.
No, this "law" and its "enforcement" depend entirely on the whims of the regulators. Are these really the kinds of "laws" you want in the EU? "Laws" where the meaning of the "law" is whatever the authorities decide it is and you can never know if you are following or breaking it? "Laws" that can change whenever new people begin "enforcing" them? Sure, a lot of you don't care, or even think it's great, because this "law" is being used right now to target American companies. As a European, it won't affect you, right? But, who knows what the future may bring and "regulators" decide to turn "laws" like this against you. Perhaps right now there are no other "laws" like this, but there may well be more, and who knows whom they may target? You are creating a model where a pretense for law replaces real laws with entirely subjective "rules" that are whatever those in charge want them to be.
To paraphrase: First they came for the American tech companies, and I did not speak out because I was not an American tech company. I'm sure you know the reference, and this is where you are heading.
It's a 'law'. It's a regulation and has to be complied with.
If you want to trace the legal why and the how you can go right back to one of the pillars of the EU: The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (as it is now known).
As for the spirit of the law. I suggest you read up on 'floor' clauses in mortgage contracts which were deemed illegal in virtually all cases, not that they are (in fact, they are perfectly legal) but because they were not communicated to consumers in a suitable fashion. In spite of being very clearly laid out in the mortgage deeds and having a public notary read them at the signing.
The case was escalated to the ECB by a Spanish judge.
The ruling (now firm) led to banks returning billions to consumers. Other similar banking abuses have also fallen foul to the ECB. I, myself am in the process of reclaiming mortgage charges that were applied to me in 2004 and that the ECB has considered unfair. Some banks are automatically calculating and refunding those charges (most without applying legal interest to the sums and hoping consumers will accept it) and others are basically dragging their feet and seeing if consumers will take them to court. If that happens and consumers have the relevant invoices etc, the bank will lose have to pay the costs and very probably the interest.
Of course, this isn't DSA/DMA related. That is too new to speak of, and Apple has already said it will appeal. We will see how that goes but Apple won't be claiming it isn't a law.
It's not only US companies that get whacked, of course.
So, tell us, based solely on the DMA and statements by regulators prior to announcing fines, what exactly would compliance look like? Please support your explanation by citing the appropriate sections of the DMA and/or regulator statements made prior to announcing fines that spell this out. Oh, and for regulator statements, please give dates and who made the statement.
Why? That is not my job. That is for the people who dealing with this issue. Does that not make sense to you?
In fact, it has already been done and Apple will base its appeal on that information.
You are not going to get spoon-fed compliance directives - ever.
Looking for that would be foolish.
Did the GDPR get that? NO. Again, interpretation is key. There have been literally thousands of cases presented and every day new situations (and interpretations) come to light. And that legislation is now relatively old.
Apple can (and will) appeal. That is the nature of the beast.
That said, this is a law and there is interpretation involved. The spirit, or whatever you want to call it.
IMO, you need only to read the preamble to the text to understand why Apple is in the current situation.
Does Apple have a dominant position (gatekeeper status)? Yes.
Has Apple knowingly and deliberately acted to harm competition? Yes.
Let's not ignore what is painfully obvious. Apple got away with abusing its position until someone decided to try and level things up. New legislation was required. And that 'someone' isn't anybody. It's the EU with support of its member states. The same has happened all over the place and something similar is very likely to spring up in the US at some point.
These rulings (once investigations have been finalised) are the result.
Apple (and everyone else in similar positions) is free to compete on a more level playing field, stop its willful restrictions on competition - or leave.
The DSA/DMA will be revised and updated over time but right now there has been a ruling and a fine.
The idea that laws require everyone to "read between the lines" and "follow the unwritten rule" (and what, hire a medium to call on its spirit?) is simply preposterous.
It is really difficult to tell if you are simply being disingenuous or are demonstrating a stunning level of ignorance. Laws and regulations rarely are so detailed as to define every instance in which they are applicable. In part because it would take forever to do so and because their authors cannot predict the future and in what instances they will need to be applied. And while your inclination may be to invoke the supernatural when you don’t understand something that isn’t what happens with laws/regulations and we also don't require everyone to read between the lines. We have clearly defined groups of people (with expertise) and a clearly defined process for doing this. Interpreting the intent of law is the role of the judiciary. Have you never seen, heard or read about court ruling? This is why Apple is afforded due process and the right to appeal when they think the law/regulation has been misapplied. Nothing preposterous about it.
There is a very real and substantial difference between a constitution and/or existing law not covering every eventuality and crafting a catchall law that is deliberately designed to mean whatever the "authorities" want it to mean. You are describing the former, while the DMA is clearly an instance of the latter and it evidences either an extreme degree of disingenuousness or a stunning level of ignorance to pretend otherwise.
You are selectively responding to my comment and just sidestepping the part where the judiciary is the independent arbiter of the DMAs implementation while pretending that the crafters are some sort of unilateral authority when they don't. It is fantastic example of conformation bias and answers the question of ignorance vs. disingenuous. It's you being disingenuous for sure. Should you choose to alter your path and have an honest discussion let me know.
Well, that's assuming the judiciary is actually independent and unbiased, which, after Ireland, clearly seems not to be the case, and equally clearly it seems they will just rubber stamp whatever the EU wants to do, particularly if it is relation to interests outside the EU. I'm afraid I'm not the one who is being disingenuous or ignorant, and you are assuring us you aren't being the former.
If you have evidence that the EU judiciary is not independent or carries a bias the feel free to share it along with all relevant citations. As it stands all you are offering is conjecture and opinion. You are obviously free to whatever onions you chose to hold but I’d rather stick with the world of facts.
Also, is think I’m ignorant, please point out where I am mistaken. My claim is pretty simple. The EU has laws and regulations and disputes are handled via the judiciary. Which of those claims am I incorrect about. Thanks.
Apple has been harmed horribly by these extortionate tactics and it must be reversed.
Trying to lower the fine amount to fly under the radar would never work as predicted.
No more abusive treatment toward Apple or any American/American company. Enough is enough. The entire dma must be deleted. It was wrong at the stsrt and it’s wrong now.
Every time time the eu steals money from an American tech company, their tarriffs should go up and sanctions implemented.
This administration doesn't play? You mean like announcing tarriffs and then immediately pausing them? I you are as pro-tarrff as you say it seems like say then you would actually be critically of Trump as all he has done is ramble incoherently about them. His actual actions have amounted to squat. Pick a lane, are you pro-tariff or pro-trump?
An agile administration can pivot and turn on a dime. A foolish one bulls ahead without thought. But even that is missing the idea that there are some nuances planned ahead of time.
Also, not "pro-tarriff" per se. Rather pro-doing the right thing. Tariffs are difficult. But it's the only way to level the playing field. No one likes a fight. But you do it when you have to. And when you do, you do it to win. Even better when you've prepared to do so.
Tariffs are difficult. But it's the only way to level the playing field.
Tariffs are the exact opposite of levelling the playing field. And the opposite of conservative talking points for years. Conservatives have spent years saying let the market decide and reduce intervention. Tariffs are a direct intervention.
When the market decides it's cheaper to manufacture things overseas they bitch and moan about levelling the playing field. If you want a level playing field, then negotiate a free trade agreement with zero tariffs and restrictions. Stop using socialist protections to subsidise your farmers and let the global market decide the most cost effective solutions. You won't do it. Because you're all full of it and think the USA has earned the right to be number 1 forever.
Apple has been harmed horribly by these extortionate tactics and it must be reversed.
Trying to lower the fine amount to fly under the radar would never work as predicted.
No more abusive treatment toward Apple or any American/American company. Enough is enough. The entire dma must be deleted. It was wrong at the stsrt and it’s wrong now.
Every time time the eu steals money from an American tech company, their tarriffs should go up and sanctions implemented.
This administration doesn't play? You mean like announcing tarriffs and then immediately pausing them? I you are as pro-tarrff as you say it seems like say then you would actually be critically of Trump as all he has done is ramble incoherently about them. His actual actions have amounted to squat. Pick a lane, are you pro-tariff or pro-trump?
An agile administration can pivot and turn on a dime. A foolish one bulls ahead without thought. But even that is missing the idea that there are some nuances planned ahead of time.
Also, not "pro-tarriff" per se. Rather pro-doing the right thing. Tariffs are difficult. But it's the only way to level the playing field. No one likes a fight. But you do it when you have to. And when you do, you do it to win. Even better when you've prepared to do so.
You are the person that was saying that tariffs in China should be 245%. Now that Trump got a pants-down spanking by China and has completely cut and run on his tariff play, you have a whole new view on tariffs. It's how we know it is a cult, no independent thought, just defend Dear Leader at all costs. The reality is the tariff "plan" was ill-conceived (most of it pointed that out as you feverishly defended it), accomplished nothing other than crashing the market, and is now being abandoned. Four months into Trump's second term, and his only accomplishment is getting rid of the penny. You will, of course, mindlessly defend it.
It is really difficult to tell if you are simply being disingenuous or are demonstrating a stunning level of ignorance. Laws and regulations rarely are so detailed as to define every instance in which they are applicable. In part because it would take forever to do so and because their authors cannot predict the future and in what instances they will need to be applied. And while your inclination may be to invoke the supernatural when you don’t understand something that isn’t what happens with laws/regulations and we also don't require everyone to read between the lines. We have clearly defined groups of people (with expertise) and a clearly defined process for doing this. Interpreting the intent of law is the role of the judiciary. Have you never seen, heard or read about court ruling? This is why Apple is afforded due process and the right to appeal when they think the law/regulation has been misapplied. Nothing preposterous about it.
Appeal to what? A kangaroo court that always fines US companies guilty and EU companies innocent? This despite the Big Five music labels all colluding to prop up a single streaming company which is innocent just because it is based in EU? The Whitehouse is right to intervene here to protect US companies.
Apple has choice. Comply or leave are two simple options. If it wants to drag its feet on compliance (in spite of extensive direct communication with the EU) it will simply run into higher fines along the way for 'malicious' compliance.
Apple has another choice: stay in EU, pay their random b.s. fines then recover the fines when the Whitehouse raises tariffs on EU to cover it.
I think Trump's originally stated goal was to use tariffs as a revenue source to allow US income taxes to be rolled back, a consumption tax in effect. Those are generally considered regressive taxes, a type of taxation that has a disproportionate effect on low and middle-income families. That's why it's favored by the wealthier who don't need to spend the bulk of their income on food and shelter, medical, and various daily needs.
From my view, the tariffs will be left in place for every country wanting to deal with us, just at a lower rate than the punishment level currently being threatened. In no scenario will the middle class benefit as much as the top 10% among us. It's not designed to, and overall it won't lead to better paying jobs for the 90% either. It's really not about jobs, it's about wealth, which always seems to bubble up faster than trickle down. Fortunately, it isn't as easy to foist on everyone as the Project writers had presumed. If only the world would cooperate and let the US run everything, right?
Lutnik has explained that he wants tariffs to realign supply chains to multiple countries, preferably allies. This is to ensure reciprocal trade without tendency to go into deficit like what happens when you create a manufacturing monopoly like with a certain communist country. So, in the longer view, it not a question of helping out the rich and make the poor pay tariffs for it. Rather, the supply chains will be realigned if the offending country does not play fair. So far, the EU has not been playing fair so they are a target of tariffs as well and their manufacturing bases will lose market share if they do not start treating US companies more fairly. By playing fair, this includes not just tariffs but also b.s. random DMA fines that seem to be all directed towards US companies. The Whitehouse has good reason to want to step in if they see biased treatment against US companies
Apple has choice. Comply or leave are two simple options. If it wants to drag its feet on compliance (in spite of extensive direct communication with the EU) it will simply run into higher fines along the way for 'malicious' compliance.
Apple has another choice: stay in EU, pay their random b.s. fines then recover the fines when the Whitehouse raises tariffs on EU to cover it.
As you have seen, if the White House applies tariffs to the EU, the EU will apply reciprocal tariffs to the US.
The more Apple 'plays' the EU, the higher the fines will be and, as Tesla has seen, there is the likelihood of users rejecting Apple products.
There is also the risk of widespread rejection of US Big Tech.
As I write, there are numerous pan EU projects underway to reduce the influence of US Big Tech in the EU.
The French and the Germans are moving to create Docs which could be an alternative to collaborative online document creation (Google Docs). There are also initiatives for Google Maps alternatives, cloud storage, the EU processor initiative etc.
The American Way (if imposed the way Trump is trying to do things) will backfire.
Just like it backfired against China in 2019. It simply pushed China to de-Americanise and accelerate their existing plans. Fast forward to 2025 and, as we are seeing, the same 2019 tactics have failed abysmally.
Most of those 13,000 items were coming from US companies and generating billions in revenue for them. Now those revenues are going elsewhere.
Other Chinese companies are doing the same.
EUV was a sticking point and here Trump's victim was ASML but now, just a few short years after (and billions lost for ASML) rumours are pointing to this:
Nvidia says it could be hit with $5B in lost revenues in China due to Trump's restrictions. China will seek (and find) home-grown substitutes to Nvidia products.
It is really difficult to tell if you are simply being disingenuous or are demonstrating a stunning level of ignorance. Laws and regulations rarely are so detailed as to define every instance in which they are applicable. In part because it would take forever to do so and because their authors cannot predict the future and in what instances they will need to be applied. And while your inclination may be to invoke the supernatural when you don’t understand something that isn’t what happens with laws/regulations and we also don't require everyone to read between the lines. We have clearly defined groups of people (with expertise) and a clearly defined process for doing this. Interpreting the intent of law is the role of the judiciary. Have you never seen, heard or read about court ruling? This is why Apple is afforded due process and the right to appeal when they think the law/regulation has been misapplied. Nothing preposterous about it.
Appeal to what? A kangaroo court that always fines US companies guilty and EU companies innocent? This despite the Big Five music labels all colluding to prop up a single streaming company which is innocent just because it is based in EU? The Whitehouse is right to intervene here to protect US companies.
If you have something other than uninformed opinions to share, please do.
Apple has choice. Comply or leave are two simple options. If it wants to drag its feet on compliance (in spite of extensive direct communication with the EU) it will simply run into higher fines along the way for 'malicious' compliance.
Apple has another choice: stay in EU, pay their random b.s. fines then recover the fines when the Whitehouse raises tariffs on EU to cover it.
Tariffs are paid by the American consumer and the revenue from the tariffs doesn’t go to American companies, it goes to the federal government. So, your solution is Apple pays the EU fine. Then the U.S government taxes American consumers for the good imported from the EU. And through some magical thinking this recovers the fine. The net result in your scenario is Apple loses money. American consumers lose money. The EU gains money and pays nothing and the federal government makes money. Nothing is “recovered”, the EU gets what it wants and Apple + consumers pay the price. This is truly the dumbest plan ever.
I think Trump's originally stated goal was to use tariffs as a revenue source to allow US income taxes to be rolled back, a consumption tax in effect. Those are generally considered regressive taxes, a type of taxation that has a disproportionate effect on low and middle-income families. That's why it's favored by the wealthier who don't need to spend the bulk of their income on food and shelter, medical, and various daily needs.
From my view, the tariffs will be left in place for every country wanting to deal with us, just at a lower rate than the punishment level currently being threatened. In no scenario will the middle class benefit as much as the top 10% among us. It's not designed to, and overall it won't lead to better paying jobs for the 90% either. It's really not about jobs, it's about wealth, which always seems to bubble up faster than trickle down. Fortunately, it isn't as easy to foist on everyone as the Project writers had presumed. If only the world would cooperate and let the US run everything, right?
Lutnik has explained that he wants tariffs to realign supply chains to multiple countries, preferably allies. This is to ensure reciprocal trade without tendency to go into deficit like what happens when you create a manufacturing monopoly like with a certain communist country. So, in the longer view, it not a question of helping out the rich and make the poor pay tariffs for it. Rather, the supply chains will be realigned if the offending country does not play fair. So far, the EU has not been playing fair so they are a target of tariffs as well and their manufacturing bases will lose market share if they do not start treating US companies more fairly. By playing fair, this includes not just tariffs but also b.s. random DMA fines that seem to be all directed towards US companies. The Whitehouse has good reason to want to step in if they see biased treatment against US companies
The problem being that it is an objectively dumb plan (Lutnick didn’t come up with it, Peter Navarro did) and Lutnick is completely unqualified to hold the position of Secretary of State Commerce. When you blindly follow an unqualified “yes” man you are going to walk off a cliff.
Sorry, but if it weren't an extortion racket they would publish actual regulations that tell companies like Apple precisely what compliance consists of. Do they do that? No, they don't, they just "find" that whatever these companies, with no concrete guidance at all on what is expected, did do "wasn't sufficient". Classic racket.
The regulations are clear. Others manage to comply.
Others? Oh good one, thought you were being serious for a moment. I know, the whole "gatekeeper" pretense makes this so ridiculous.
I will just say to those of you cheerleading the EU on this that what you are actually cheerleading is the undermining of the rule of law. And what's going on with EU regulators "enforcing" the DMA erodes the rule of law in a way that is entirely insidious and perhaps even more dangerous than what's going on in the US right now. It doesn't matter what the regulators intentions are, they have created and are part of a process that so corrupts the notion of law as to render it meaningless.
This so-called "law" known as the DMA, and the regulatory bodies "enforcing" it, is not actually law at all. What it is is a purported "legal" framework that erodes the very concept of law in a way that leads to lawlessness. Much is talked about the "spirit of the law" in regard to the DMA, but that's not how law works. Law works according to the letter of the law, and anything that depends on "spirit" is not actually law.
Something as nebulous as "spirit" isn't law because laws must clearly state what they mean. How can anyone know if they are following the law, or breaking it, if the laws is so ill defined as to depend entirely on the "interpretation" that regulators choose to give it. Even in announcing these fines against Apple, they haven't said exactly how Apple "violated" the law, nor exactly how they could be in compliance. Instead there is hand waving verbiage that states Apple hasn't done enough and isn't in compliance, but nothing at all on what compliance would actually look like. How could anyone know if they are compliant if they don't know what compliance is? It's like posting a sign, "Speed Limit", with no indication of what that limit is but telling motorists that they must follow the spirit of the speed limit.
No, this "law" and its "enforcement" depend entirely on the whims of the regulators. Are these really the kinds of "laws" you want in the EU? "Laws" where the meaning of the "law" is whatever the authorities decide it is and you can never know if you are following or breaking it? "Laws" that can change whenever new people begin "enforcing" them? Sure, a lot of you don't care, or even think it's great, because this "law" is being used right now to target American companies. As a European, it won't affect you, right? But, who knows what the future may bring and "regulators" decide to turn "laws" like this against you. Perhaps right now there are no other "laws" like this, but there may well be more, and who knows whom they may target? You are creating a model where a pretense for law replaces real laws with entirely subjective "rules" that are whatever those in charge want them to be.
To paraphrase: First they came for the American tech companies, and I did not speak out because I was not an American tech company. I'm sure you know the reference, and this is where you are heading.
It's a 'law'. It's a regulation and has to be complied with.
If you want to trace the legal why and the how you can go right back to one of the pillars of the EU: The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (as it is now known).
As for the spirit of the law. I suggest you read up on 'floor' clauses in mortgage contracts which were deemed illegal in virtually all cases, not that they are (in fact, they are perfectly legal) but because they were not communicated to consumers in a suitable fashion. In spite of being very clearly laid out in the mortgage deeds and having a public notary read them at the signing.
The case was escalated to the ECB by a Spanish judge.
The ruling (now firm) led to banks returning billions to consumers. Other similar banking abuses have also fallen foul to the ECB. I, myself am in the process of reclaiming mortgage charges that were applied to me in 2004 and that the ECB has considered unfair. Some banks are automatically calculating and refunding those charges (most without applying legal interest to the sums and hoping consumers will accept it) and others are basically dragging their feet and seeing if consumers will take them to court. If that happens and consumers have the relevant invoices etc, the bank will lose have to pay the costs and very probably the interest.
Of course, this isn't DSA/DMA related. That is too new to speak of, and Apple has already said it will appeal. We will see how that goes but Apple won't be claiming it isn't a law.
It's not only US companies that get whacked, of course.
So, tell us, based solely on the DMA and statements by regulators prior to announcing fines, what exactly would compliance look like? Please support your explanation by citing the appropriate sections of the DMA and/or regulator statements made prior to announcing fines that spell this out. Oh, and for regulator statements, please give dates and who made the statement.
Why? That is not my job. That is for the people who dealing with this issue. Does that not make sense to you?
In fact, it has already been done and Apple will base its appeal on that information.
You are not going to get spoon-fed compliance directives - ever.
Looking for that would be foolish.
Did the GDPR get that? NO. Again, interpretation is key. There have been literally thousands of cases presented and every day new situations (and interpretations) come to light. And that legislation is now relatively old.
Apple can (and will) appeal. That is the nature of the beast.
That said, this is a law and there is interpretation involved. The spirit, or whatever you want to call it.
IMO, you need only to read the preamble to the text to understand why Apple is in the current situation.
Does Apple have a dominant position (gatekeeper status)? Yes.
Has Apple knowingly and deliberately acted to harm competition? Yes.
Let's not ignore what is painfully obvious. Apple got away with abusing its position until someone decided to try and level things up. New legislation was required. And that 'someone' isn't anybody. It's the EU with support of its member states. The same has happened all over the place and something similar is very likely to spring up in the US at some point.
These rulings (once investigations have been finalised) are the result.
Apple (and everyone else in similar positions) is free to compete on a more level playing field, stop its willful restrictions on competition - or leave.
The DSA/DMA will be revised and updated over time but right now there has been a ruling and a fine.
The idea that laws require everyone to "read between the lines" and "follow the unwritten rule" (and what, hire a medium to call on its spirit?) is simply preposterous.
It is really difficult to tell if you are simply being disingenuous or are demonstrating a stunning level of ignorance. Laws and regulations rarely are so detailed as to define every instance in which they are applicable. In part because it would take forever to do so and because their authors cannot predict the future and in what instances they will need to be applied. And while your inclination may be to invoke the supernatural when you don’t understand something that isn’t what happens with laws/regulations and we also don't require everyone to read between the lines. We have clearly defined groups of people (with expertise) and a clearly defined process for doing this. Interpreting the intent of law is the role of the judiciary. Have you never seen, heard or read about court ruling? This is why Apple is afforded due process and the right to appeal when they think the law/regulation has been misapplied. Nothing preposterous about it.
There is a very real and substantial difference between a constitution and/or existing law not covering every eventuality and crafting a catchall law that is deliberately designed to mean whatever the "authorities" want it to mean. You are describing the former, while the DMA is clearly an instance of the latter and it evidences either an extreme degree of disingenuousness or a stunning level of ignorance to pretend otherwise.
You are selectively responding to my comment and just sidestepping the part where the judiciary is the independent arbiter of the DMAs implementation while pretending that the crafters are some sort of unilateral authority when they don't. It is fantastic example of conformation bias and answers the question of ignorance vs. disingenuous. It's you being disingenuous for sure. Should you choose to alter your path and have an honest discussion let me know.
Well, that's assuming the judiciary is actually independent and unbiased, which, after Ireland, clearly seems not to be the case, and equally clearly it seems they will just rubber stamp whatever the EU wants to do, particularly if it is relation to interests outside the EU. I'm afraid I'm not the one who is being disingenuous or ignorant, and you are assuring us you aren't being the former.
If you have evidence that the EU judiciary is not independent or carries a bias the feel free to share it along with all relevant citations. As it stands all you are offering is conjecture and opinion. You are obviously free to whatever onions you chose to hold but I’d rather stick with the world of facts.
Also, is think I’m ignorant, please point out where I am mistaken. My claim is pretty simple. The EU has laws and regulations and disputes are handled via the judiciary. Which of those claims am I incorrect about. Thanks.
As already mentioned, but conveniently ignored by you, the Ireland case has already proven that Apple will never get any justice from the EU and that the judiciary are as biased as the so-called "regulators" — i.e., the extortionists — and clearly controlled by them. So, lack of independence, bias, corruption, the judiciary are all in on the game. Someone above mentioned a "kangaroo court", and that's exactly what we see in these cases.
It's really kind of sad that you guys fell so far behind on everything, but it's really not acceptable that you just steal it from us to "level the playing field" as you like to say.
Appeal to what? A kangaroo court that always fines US companies guilty and EU companies innocent?
Do you really believe that the US news bubble that you live in would report on the EU Commission fining EU companies? Newsflash, they have done so many times, you are just ignorant of it.
Apple has been harmed horribly by these extortionate tactics and it must be reversed.
Trying to lower the fine amount to fly under the radar would never work as predicted.
No more abusive treatment toward Apple or any American/American company. Enough is enough. The entire dma must be deleted. It was wrong at the stsrt and it’s wrong now.
Every time time the eu steals money from an American tech company, their tarriffs should go up and sanctions implemented.
This administration doesn't play? You mean like announcing tarriffs and then immediately pausing them? I you are as pro-tarrff as you say it seems like say then you would actually be critically of Trump as all he has done is ramble incoherently about them. His actual actions have amounted to squat. Pick a lane, are you pro-tariff or pro-trump?
An agile administration can pivot and turn on a dime. A foolish one bulls ahead without thought. But even that is missing the idea that there are some nuances planned ahead of time.
Also, not "pro-tarriff" per se. Rather pro-doing the right thing. Tariffs are difficult. But it's the only way to level the playing field. No one likes a fight. But you do it when you have to. And when you do, you do it to win. Even better when you've prepared to do so.
Slavishly painting a bullseye around every misthrown dart while loudly remarking on the king’s incredible skill might make the king happy. After all, this is the same king who keeps proudly announcing -with a straight face- how he’s just won another golf tournament. The thing is, the king is not reading these posts, and everyone else can see you painting the bullseyes.
This whole question of the bias and corruption of the EU judicial system, while interesting in and of itself and an actual problem, is really a red herring. If you create a legal framework that legalizes, in fact institutionalizes, piracy, then even an unbiased judge, working within that corrupt framework, must rule that the piracy is legal. And legalizing and institutionalizing piracy, theft, is exactly what the EU has done with the DMA. So, in fact, there is no legal recourse if an American company thinks a ruling is unfair, because the entire legal framework behind that ruling is in fact corrupt.
I think it's time for the gloves to come off. honestly... this is a disgrace. How long are you guys across the pond (westwards, to be clear) watching this disaster unfolding?
Yes the US are very important for the whole world's economy, but there's limits to everything. We should stop this appeasing and just call out things what they are. The US government decided that diplomacy is no longer "in", so the rest of the world should not be trying to uphold principles towards the US that are not reciprocated.
“Time for the gloves to come off”. LoL. The EU has no technology. Zero. Nothing. That is why it spends all its time with bureaucracy and trying to fine everyone
Comments
Apple didn’t comply, but tried their best to circumnavigate them. Classic monopoly abusing their power.
I happen to like the monopoly and am more than happy with a closed ecosystem that protects my privacy and security. But the regulations clearly say that Apple, as a gatekeeper, is required to allow for the distribution of apps on its iOS operating system by means other than through the Apple App. Apple doesn’t sufficiently do this with conditions it imposes on developers. Fine fully justified. Apple has the right to appeal.
Pivot and play are two different things.
Pivot
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pivot
Play
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/play
An agile administration can pivot and turn on a dime. A foolish one bulls ahead without thought. But even that is missing the idea that there are some nuances planned ahead of time.
Also, not "pro-tarriff" per se. Rather pro-doing the right thing. Tariffs are difficult. But it's the only way to level the playing field. No one likes a fight. But you do it when you have to. And when you do, you do it to win. Even better when you've prepared to do so.
When the market decides it's cheaper to manufacture things overseas they bitch and moan about levelling the playing field. If you want a level playing field, then negotiate a free trade agreement with zero tariffs and restrictions. Stop using socialist protections to subsidise your farmers and let the global market decide the most cost effective solutions. You won't do it. Because you're all full of it and think the USA has earned the right to be number 1 forever.
Apple has another choice: stay in EU, pay their random b.s. fines then recover the fines when the Whitehouse raises tariffs on EU to cover it.
Lutnik has explained that he wants tariffs to realign supply chains to multiple countries, preferably allies. This is to ensure reciprocal trade without tendency to go into deficit like what happens when you create a manufacturing monopoly like with a certain communist country. So, in the longer view, it not a question of helping out the rich and make the poor pay tariffs for it. Rather, the supply chains will be realigned if the offending country does not play fair. So far, the EU has not been playing fair so they are a target of tariffs as well and their manufacturing bases will lose market share if they do not start treating US companies more fairly. By playing fair, this includes not just tariffs but also b.s. random DMA fines that seem to be all directed towards US companies. The Whitehouse has good reason to want to step in if they see biased treatment against US companies
The more Apple 'plays' the EU, the higher the fines will be and, as Tesla has seen, there is the likelihood of users rejecting Apple products.
There is also the risk of widespread rejection of US Big Tech.
As I write, there are numerous pan EU projects underway to reduce the influence of US Big Tech in the EU.
The French and the Germans are moving to create Docs which could be an alternative to collaborative online document creation (Google Docs). There are also initiatives for Google Maps alternatives, cloud storage, the EU processor initiative etc.
The American Way (if imposed the way Trump is trying to do things) will backfire.
Just like it backfired against China in 2019. It simply pushed China to de-Americanise and accelerate their existing plans. Fast forward to 2025 and, as we are seeing, the same 2019 tactics have failed abysmally.
https://www.pcmag.com/news/huawei-replaces-13000-parts-redesigns-4000-circuit-boards-to-beat-us-sanctions
Most of those 13,000 items were coming from US companies and generating billions in revenue for them. Now those revenues are going elsewhere.
Other Chinese companies are doing the same.
EUV was a sticking point and here Trump's victim was ASML but now, just a few short years after (and billions lost for ASML) rumours are pointing to this:
https://www.lightreading.com/5g/huawei-might-finally-have-a-chinese-fix-for-high-end-chips
Nvidia says it could be hit with $5B in lost revenues in China due to Trump's restrictions. China will seek (and find) home-grown substitutes to Nvidia products.
It's not looking great, is it?
magical thinking this recovers the fine. The net result in your scenario is Apple loses money. American consumers lose money. The EU gains money and pays nothing and the federal government makes money. Nothing is “recovered”, the EU gets what it wants and Apple + consumers pay the price. This is truly the dumbest plan ever.
It's really kind of sad that you guys fell so far behind on everything, but it's really not acceptable that you just steal it from us to "level the playing field" as you like to say.
Go ahead and “take your gloves off” LoL