Not so nice, we investigated them twice: EU opens double whammy of inquiries into Apple's biz practices
- Reference: 1592321534
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/06/16/eu_apple_competition_investigations/
- Source link:
The [2]first investigation , prompted by complaints from Spotify and Rakuten (which is described solely as "an e-book and audiobook distributor" in the EC release), will determine whether Apple has used its digital marketplaces to stifle competition from rivals in the digital services space.
As with sales of apps, Apple takes a 30 per cent cut of all in-app purchases – say, for example, some coins in a mobile game, or a month's subscription to Spotify. And while it's possible for developers to circumvent this (Spotify, for example, lets you pay via their website or with gift cards), developers aren't allowed to inform users about payment alternatives within the app.
These, the commission notes, are often cheaper. For example, a month's subscription to YouTube Premium paid via the App Store costs £15.99. Go direct to YouTube, and the price drops to £11.99. That's a saving of £48 annually.
Not only is this financially lucrative for Apple, but it also gives it control over the commercial relationship between the third-party app and the customer. Apple has access to potentially commercially significant customer data that the third-party provider simply doesn't.
The commission is worried this could distort the market, giving Apple's own products (like Apple Music) an unfair advantage over the competition. After all, Cupertino's homegrown efforts aren't subject to the same cut as their third-party rivals.
In a statement, Margrethe Vestager, who heads up competition policy at the European Commission, said: "It appears that Apple obtained a 'gatekeeper' role when it comes to the distribution of apps and content to users of Apple's popular devices.
"We need to ensure that Apple's rules do not distort competition in markets where Apple is competing with other app developers, for example with its music streaming service Apple Music or with Apple Books. I have therefore decided to take a close look at Apple's App Store rules and their compliance with EU competition rules."
The European Economic Area is a key market for Apple. More to the point, services are now a huge part of the company's revenue stream, with Cupertino yesterday announcing that the App Store ecosystem had [3]facilitated $519bn in e-commerce activity during 2019 . That's $1.5bn more than the estimated GDP of Belgium last year.
If Apple is forced to allow third-party developers to take direct payments for in-app purchases, it could see that number (and its share of the revenue) plunge.
Separately, the commission is [4]waving a beady eye over Apple Pay to see it's not falling foul of any competition rules.
Apple Pay is the sole NFC mobile payments tool available to iPhone users, allowing individuals to make in-store purchases by tapping their phone against a contactless reader. For this, Apple takes a 0.15 per cent cut of each transaction.
In contrast, Android is a broader ecosystem, with Google Pay competing directly with equivalents from Samsung and Huawei.
The commission is concerned that Apple is unlawfully stifling competition and innovation by using its "walled garden" status to prevent rivals from building iOS NFC payment apps.
"It is important that Apple's measures do not deny consumers the benefits of new payment technologies, including better choice, quality, innovation and competitive prices," said Vestager. "I have therefore decided to take a close look at Apple's practices regarding Apple Pay and their impact on competition."
This investigation comes as scrutiny is increasingly applied to Apple Pay, with German lawmakers voting in favour of a measure that would compel Cupertino to allow third-party access to the NFC chip found within the iPhone.
Apple is predictably nonplussed, [5]warning via Reuters that the bill , which has yet to be ratified by Germany's Bundesrat, would harm "user friendliness, data protection and the security of financial information."
This isn't the first time Apple has found itself in the European Commission's crosshairs. In 2016, after an arduous two-year investigation, the commission found that Apple was the recipient of illegal state aid from Ireland, and forced it to repay €13bn in back taxes. Apple has [6]appealed against the ruling .
The Register has asked Apple, Spotify, and Rakuten for comment.
Updated on 16 June 17.44 BST to add:
Apple sent us a statement following publication of the article. “We follow the law in everything we do and we embrace competition at every stage because we believe it pushes us to deliver even better results.
"It's disappointing the European Commission is advancing baseless complaints from a handful of companies who simply want a free ride, and don't want to play by the same rules as everyone else. We don’t think that’s right — we want to maintain a level playing field where anyone with determination and a great idea can succeed.
"At the end of the day, our goal is simple: for our customers to have access to the best app or service of their choice, in a safe and secure environment. We welcome the opportunity to show the European Commission all we’ve done to make that goal a reality.” ®
Sponsored: [7]Free Hands-on Training: Kubernetes in Google Cloud
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6-IQAdFU3w
[2] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1073
[3] https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2020/06/apples-app-store-ecosystem-facilitated-over-half-a-trillion-dollars-in-commerce-in-2019/
[4] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1075
[5] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-germany-apple-pay/apple-warns-of-risks-from-german-law-to-open-up-mobile-payments-idUSKBN1XP16M
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2019/09/17/apple_eu_tax_appeal/
[7] https://go.theregister.com/tl/1956/-9042/free-hands-on-training-kubernetes-in-google-cloud?td=wptl1956
I don’t quite understand this
This is like an independent car dealer complaining that Ford dealers can sell Ford cars cheaper because they don’t have to pay the manufacturers profit.
Re: I don’t quite understand this
what about accessories and spare-parts though?
Re: I don’t quite understand this
More like 3rd-party manufacturers being obliged to sell their accessories (eg tyres, wiper blades, seat covers, fluffy dice, etc) for Ford vehicles through Ford dealers, and pay Ford a hefty fee for the privilege.
Or, say, music companies being forced to sell their music (to be played in a Ford vehicle) through Ford dealers, and again, paying Ford a hefty fee for the privilege.
Re: I don’t quite understand this
They are absolutely _not_ forced to sell through Apple. Netflix doesn't pay Apple a penny, for example. So this is like music companies having a choice to sell CDs through Ford dealers, or through their music stores, and Ford charges for CDs sold through Ford dealers, and not for CDs bought anywhere else.
Re: I don’t quite understand this
The vast majority of the music on my home system never went anywhere near Apple. Almost all is music I personally converted from vinyl and audiotapes and CDs over a period of decades as I was NOT going to buy that music again. I have, only a few years ago, finally decommissioned my LP records as the last of them are now on my music volume.
Zero point zero of the movies on my system came from Apple; some were moved over from VHS and DVD, some were digital downloads purchased with DVD/BluRay discs. None came from Apple.
But, hey, carry on.
Apple [claims the bill] would harm "user friendliness, data protection and the security of financial information."
Funny way to say "Our profits"...
30% is outrageous
Apps are what make a platform, and where mobes are concerned, it is what makes them more attractive than the competition.
Apple is imposing a luxury tax on developers when they are the ones who bring value to the entire Apple ecosystem. What have I just read about HTC ? It has crap apps. Doesn't make me feel like buying a phone from them.
As far as apps are concerned, Apple is just a facilitator. Yes, it provides the App Store, but don't try to make me believe that that is costing Apple $100Bn/year.
The normal fee of an intermediary is 10%. That is what Apple should have the right to ask for.
Re: 30% is outrageous
30% is supposed to cover not just distribution but also advertising costs. The real problem is the exclusivity clause.
Re: 30% is outrageous
I know two wrongs don't make a right but it AFAIK, Google also charges 30% for purchases from the Play Store.
Isn't Google (with Android) bigger than Apple in Europe?
Either way, 30% is too high
I'm surprised that no-one has taken Apple to court over it's App Store practices - or is there a gagging clause in the App Store T+Cs ?
The first rule of doing business with Apple: you are not allowed to talk about doing business with Apple.
The worm in the picture doesn't seem right to me
Are you sure, El Reg, that worms dwelling inside apples have antennas and legs ?
FTFY
and we embrace and extinguish competition at every stage
Honestly, Apple not really doing anything wrong. I blame all the fsck(8)wits who tie themselves down to this foul stuff.
It isn't defective by design. The users are!
Not only Apple in the EU's sights
Amazon is lined up for the EU Inquisition as well.
Two mega US corps apparently doing evil. Where's the investigation into Google? Isn't 'Evil' Google's middle name.
The Register has asked Apple, Spotify, and Rakuten for comment.
And no prizes for guessing which one is highly unlikely to respond!