longfang

lkrupp said:

waveparticle said:

This is frivolous to the lowest level. TikTok is an entertaining tool. Government building is for working. Of course it is inappropriate to use TikTok. But making it a national security issue is a plot by China haters to silence democracy. 

Maybe the NSA, CIA, and the U.S. Military know something you don’t. But then you’re just a Chinese government operative spreading disinformation and propaganda. And who are you to be talking about democracy when your leader is a vicious despot.

Muzgash69 said:

I disagree with part of the article here "would require expensive and complex CNC machining". Think of how a lot of metal today is molded with a die press. The same could be done here. I'd be even so ventured to say that is how the backs are currently manufactured. A metal shell that is mold made is nothing new or unique. I think it assuming that this would be more expensive even if the internals have to be reorganized.

jimh2 said:

How are they going to pay their fair share? No one rides for free. 

crowley said:

williamh said:

crowley said:

rob53 said:

EU is a dictatorship, plain and simple. At this point Apple needs to seriously tell the EU to GTH. The US needs to triple import duties on EU goods effectively shutting the EU down. The US should also reduce exports to the EU and cut off any financial support. 

Weird how the EU dictatorship has so many elections.  

Calling the EU a dictatorship seems way overblown, but still, when did the European public get to vote for the EU Council president?  European Commission president?  How about the European parliament president?  That's right, there aren't public elections for those positions.  

 https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/leadership/presidents_en

So?  The Commission President and the Parliament President are elected by the Parliament, who are elected by the public.  The Council President is elected by the heads of state of all the members, who have also been elected by the public.

That's representative democracy, even if it's not direct democracy.

avon b7 said:

carnegie said:

avon b7 said:

Cesar Battistini Maziero said:

Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut. 

Every online store gets a cut from sales.

It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.

Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with. 

On the face of it, this comment by Apple does not appear to be in the spirit of the rule but we'll have to see how it plays out. 

At the end of the day all of this is basically part of a bigger puzzle and no one knows what it's going to look like yet. 

I don't see where Apple's comment is contrary to the spirit of the Netherlands ACM's decision. Whether Apple could continue to collect a commission for, among other things, the use of its IP wasn't at issue. The summary of the decision doesn't even mention Apple's commission. Apple's commission isn't what the ACM concluded was problematic.

If the ACM meant to prevent Apple from collecting the commission, its failure in the summary to mention the commission and explain why it's problematic would seem conspicuous. But the reality is this decision isn't about the commission. Whether or not the Netherlands would like to prevent Apple from collecting that commission, it likely understands that it probably can't. Doing so would probably violate international intellectual property agreements.

I haven't followed the case beyond what it was based on which is anti competitive behaviour under EU regulations and Dutch consumer protections. 

Apple basically coming out and saying 'we'll get our cut one way or another' flies against the spirit of the decision at a very basic level. 

But that's why I said we'll have to see how it plays out. As it is right now, according to AI, the Dutch authorities are studying Apple's proposal to see if it is acceptable.