The terms would make something like F-Droid impossible. The fundamental problem is that Apple believes it is owed a fee when people distribute apps for the iPhone, but no legal mechanism entitles them to such a fee; I’m fairly sure it’s possible to make an iPhone app without copying any of Apple’s copyrighted code or using any of their patents.
The only mechanism that allows them to collect one is their technical control over the platform, and that’s what the DMA was intended to remove.
So you’re saying the DMA wasn’t created specifically to fuck over small content creators? TIL
I’m fairly sure it’s possible to make an iPhone app without copying any of Apple’s copyrighted code or using any of their patents.
This sounds wrong, but I was never particularly interested in iOS app development, so take that with a grain of salt.
The GNU GPL prohibits non-GPL software from even dynamically linking to GPL libraries. Assuming that enforcing such a condition is acceptable under relevant copyright law, and that you can’t make an iOS app without linking to any Apple libraries, Apple does have a legal mechanism to enforce this.
French developers may get a pass, with VLC and all.
The GPL has an exception for “system libraries” on this regard, but it’s as handwavy as the rest of the license.
The GPL isn’t meant to be a real license, it’s supposed to be a toxic waste bucket that companies don’t want to interact with. This it succeeds at.
The vlc thing is about France not recognising patents on algorithms, unless I’m missing something there’s otherwise no law relevant to software licensing
It’s probably more efficient to tax away most of the fees Apple charges until they fall in line.
Apple would just pass the tax on with higher developer fees.
Apple said it spent “months in conversation with the European Commission” about the DMA and that its plan reflects the work of “hundreds of Apple team members who spent tens of thousands of hours” on the solution.
This is something I can absolutely believe, attorney spent many hours twisting the law, bending it and figuring it in what way they could avoid it. Just like how Google, Microsoft, Amazon and apple are all evading taxes in Europe by setting companies in Ireland.
The law is simple, allow other app store on iPhones. It didn’t need thousands of hours to figure it
Like a kid with a restriction. 1 minute to comply or an hour to figure out how to technically comply but get around it.
Little tech too.
Little penguin people are not pleased
Big tech is unimpressed by big tech
Let them get fucked by EU fines then? At least they are big enough to not just be a slap on the wrist.
I’m betting they are following the letter of the law perfectly, since the spirit of the law is being violated so blatantly.
They likely had their lawyers pour over things to make sure they are exploiting every possible loophole.
I’m betting they are following the letter of the law perfectly
Have you read the law, or is that just a blind bet? Spoiler, here’s a quote from the legislation (Article 5, item 4):
The gatekeeper shall allow business users, free of charge, to communicate and promote offers, including under different conditions, to end users acquired via its core platform service or through other channels, and to conclude contracts with those end users, regardless of whether, for that purpose, they use the core platform services of the gatekeeper.
I bolded the most obvious point - Apple is charging a core technology fee (50 cents per user per year) even though the letter of the law is “free of charge”.
More broadly, there’s a fundamental problem that apps distributed are required to be submitted to Apple for approval even if they’re distributed out side the store. Apple says they will check less things, but obviously they are still checking some things and will still reject some apps. Developers are also required to a “core platform service” operated by Apple in order to do that submission and pay those fees. Apple can’t require that, as I read the legislation they have to allow developers to distribute apps without using or agreeing to any terms with Apple.
The legislation does allow Apple to block apps that are malware/etc - but the company is going far beyond that.
They likely had their lawyers pour over things to make sure they are exploiting every possible loophole.
I don’t think that’s what has happened. Apple has one of the best legal teams int he world, there’s no way they missed that “free of charge” requirement. I think they had their lawyers poor over things to find some way to avoid complying with the law in a way that will require years of ongoing investigations and lawsuits between Apple and the EU. Meanwhile the status quo continues and all apps go through the App Store.
Are you sure you’re not misunderstanding the quoted section? To me, admittedly not a lawyer, that reads like “Apple has to allow Netflix to say “hey, you can get this cheaper through this other button that is different than the Apple Pay option” without charging the developer for that “privledge”” while you seem to be taking it as “Apple has to allow third party payment without taking a cut.”
This is what I’m talking about. If there is any ambiguity, their lawyers will pounce on it. Even if it means they get a slap on the wrist, they can turn around and say “oh, sorry, the legislation wasn’t totally clear we will get that fixed real quick in a year, these things take time after all.”
Violating the spirit of the law is still violating the law, at least in Germany; the EU may have similar rules.
I’m always having a hard time keeping me dry when I read something about Meta, Google and Microsoft being _so ethical _ Hi-la-ri-ous. No Tommy Cooper or Spike Milligan made me laugh so much.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
EU regulators, who are preparing to fine the tech giant 500 million euros in March over allegedly favoring its music-streaming app against competitors like Spotify, are also being lobbied to reject Apple’s proposals to satisfy the bloc’s Digital Markets Act.
Apple announced last month it will make changes to its iOS mobile software in Europe, such as allowing users to download apps from other sources and access alternative payment systems.
Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has also dismissed Apple’s proposal as “onerous” and “at odds” with the intent of the EU regulation, saying he would be surprised “if any developer chose to go into the alternative app stores.”
The growing backlash has left the European Commission, the EU’s executive arm, with the dilemma of deciding whether years of work on the new legislation aimed at digital “gatekeepers” has had its desired effect on Apple—and whether it can sanction the company for failing to comply.
Meta and Microsoft are also hit by the DMA but spot an opportunity to grab a greater share of the around $27 billion Apple made in 2023 from App Store sales, according to data from Sensor Tower.
Nicholas Rodelli at CFRA Research said Meta’s move was a “direct challenge” to Apple’s policies, with tech companies now “going on the offensive” to exploit the iPhone maker’s new regulatory vulnerabilities.
The original article contains 935 words, the summary contains 222 words. Saved 76%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I wonder when the invites will be sent out. I’m curious how much a share will cost and I’m curious about who these 75k loyal users could be. Will it be the same group that got the free NFTs, as they were only given to the top contributors weren’t they?
