This is the framing Apple wants to sell for their decision to withhold features from the EU, and blogs are parroting it.
In reality, Apple is purposefully withholding these features from the EU, either because Apple are being retaliatory against EU customers for the existence of the DMA, or because Apple (with full knowledge of the DMA for years) refused to build these features in compliance with it.
Apple chose to harm their products in the EU. The DMA didn't. This framing is marketing.
@stevestreza On the other hand, only a multi-trillion another corporation has the resources to push back against the entire EU.
My guess is that is their goal, and this has been a long time coming. Sooner or later, the EU was going to impose enough restrictions on digital companies that we would see a company pull the "It is no longer economically viable to offer our products and services in the EU marketplace" card... And see if the European community has become globally monocultural enough to call the EU's bluff.
@stevestreza How could it be otherwise? If the EU wants to go to war with Apple and Apple wants to take up the banner instead of capitulating to a foreign power, what would you recommend we call it?
Apple isn't based in the EU and it can, in fact, pull up stakes and simply not offer products and services that are incompatible with the EU's opinion of how the internet should be run to EU citizens (and then leave it to the citizens of the EU to use their democratic authority to change those incompatibilities. Or to decide they prefer it the EU's way and they'd rather not have Apple's products and services. Or to discover that they never had those Democratic authorities in the first place, and then... Uh oh! In the 21st century, most war is economic war).
Let them pull out of the EU. It's not like it's a 500-million-people largely quite wealthy market that Apple could ill afford to loose.
I can't shed a tear for a supranational extremely arrogant US megacorp who thinks they are mightier than God and deserve anything and everything they want and demand
@dmitriid @stevestreza indeed, I think that's the next play in this game.
I believe Apple is seeking to determine whether a 500-million-person-quite-wealthy demographic is dependent enough on their ecosystem of products and services that they would be willing to leverage the power such wealth and influence brings to try and push back on the EU's new laws.
What soft power can they leverage that will make it politically inconvenient for the EU to continue to pursue this gatekeeping strategy?
You mean, what soft power can we leverage to make it inconvenient for Apple to pursue its gatekeeping strategy.
I also like that you basically say "Apple should figure out how to hold Europeans hostage to get whatever it wants"
As for the EU, first understand what the EU is and does: https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2024/facing-reality-in-the-eu-and-tech/
@dmitriid @stevestreza If Apple cuts off services in compliance with the law, is it Apple holding EU citizens hostage, EU citizens holding themselves hostage (i.e. "They saw this law coming; why didn't they distance themselves from Apple's ecosystem and find alternatives?"), or EU's regulators holding citizens hostage?
I think Apple is betting there's more than one answer to the question.
(To be clear: it's a huge, weird bet and I respect the opinion that the starting-gate position should have been "Don't do that." But I've been watching governments regulate the Internet long enough to also not accept the premise that regulators are always right in what citizens want or need. It'll be interesting to see how this sifts out).
FTA:
The EU absolutely is for protecting and strengthening the European single market.
No disagreement there. But I also observe that Apple is under no obligation to be aligned with that goal (over, say, strengthening and regularizing a global marketplace that simplifies the creation of Apple's products by requiring fewer special cases).
The EC has identified six gatekeepers, zero of which are European companies. This specific move is pretty naked protectionism (which, to be clear, is well within the EU's purview). Apple is making an... Interesting decision by saying "Okay, we play ball. You're protected. Someone else, we're sure, will backfill the products and services we provide."
(ETA: What I find most interesting in all of this is that Alphabet is also a gatekeeper company and, AFAIK, they are playing ball. So Apple is really betting that their offering is so good that people won't jump ship to Android, which is more-or-less "right over there" from a consumer perspective.
Will that bet work? I'll be interested to see).
Thank you for this very detailed and measured response!
I could argue or disagree with some minor points, but that would not be productive.
The only "big" disagreement I have is "if Apple withholds services in compliance with the law" in that this assumption rests on Apples claims. And we've already seen in the past how Apple reversed course after making similar claims.
But yeah, it truly is a huge weird bet, so we'll need a lot of popcorn to watch how it plays out.
@mark @stevestreza EU has no desire to “go to war with Apple”. EU is trying to protect its citizens. If you put a fence around a chicken coop you’re not going to war with foxes. The fact that Apple is trying to weaponize features of their operating system as political campaign tools doesn’t imply that they are subject to an attack.
And like any other company, if Apple is unable to run a viable business while respecting the rule of law, then good riddance. But I do think Apple are the ones doing most of the bluffing here.
Steve Streza
Mark T. Tomczak
dmitriid
Johan Pelck Olsen