|
Top-level
@stevestreza not sure I understand the full context. If a law is not completely clear to me as a company then I would not offer a product in the country where that law is applicable – until everything is clarified. It might be that everything is completely clear to Apple and they have hidden motives, but what are the indicators ? 7 comments
@stevestreza in my experience a product can be ‘finished' and it may still take many months until all ‘compliance’ is done. The back and forth between ‘product’ and ‘legal/compliance’ is sometimes mind boggling and seems to be written by Kafka … If I can release my product already in countries where the compliance requirements are simpler, I would choose to release them as early as possible.  @kontrafiktion Nope, at these companies, compliance is baked into the product process, because it HAS TO BE. And if it isn't, then it's arguably negligent on Apple's part to know a regulation existed and not accounting for it in development. Compare this to GDPR, which also had heavy-handed regulations that can be reasonably complained about. Apple has no problem integrating those regulatory rules into their products from day one. Why? Because they know they will need to.  @kontrafiktion @stevestreza It might also be that sufficiently much of the law is clear to them and they don’t feel it’s in their commercial interests to comply with it (so they take the legal remedy of not putting themselves in the jurisdiction of that law). I’m not against some DMA-like law (leaving aside whether I think this one “works”), but if some jurisdiction said “you can’t sell your software unless you give all our citizens free hardware to run it on”… 1/2 @kontrafiktion @stevestreza … then you’d understand if Microsoft refused to do business in that jurisdiction. The EU has said Apple can comply with their law or get out; Apple are saying that if those are the choices they’d like to take option 2. You can ask whether that’s the right decision *from Apple’s perspective*—perhaps they’re not being sufficiently … patient, to pick up on @gruber’s theme … but if they don’t want to play, that’s their decision @kontrafiktion @stevestreza @gruber As I say, I’m in favour of regulation of various kinds, and I’m not convinced that the EU is being covertly protectionist, but if “Apple decides not to offer infringing features in Europe” wasn’t somewhere on the list of potential outcomes of the DMA, these specific regulators messed up their plan. @kontrafiktion @stevestreza @gruber Personally I think I’d like someone to step in and fill the commercial niche. As remarked above, Apple has shifted over the last 20 years from “plucky rebel” to “established order” and maybe it’s time for a new disruptive upstart to emerge—if only to keep them honest. |
Gregory's Server
@kontrafiktion At any large company there is a legal team and a compliance team to ensure that products are going to be ok with regulators. Apple has a whole website just to talk about how great they are at compliance. https://www.apple.com/compliance/
There is zero chance they are not completely and institutionally aware of what is expected of them by the EU and the DMA. It is settled law and has been for a year and a half.