{"id":35144,"date":"2022-03-01T10:48:47","date_gmt":"2022-03-01T15:48:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=35144"},"modified":"2022-03-01T10:48:47","modified_gmt":"2022-03-01T15:48:47","slug":"apple-says-its-complying-with-acm","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2022\/03\/01\/apple-says-its-complying-with-acm\/","title":{"rendered":"Apple Says It’s Complying With ACM"},"content":{"rendered":"

Toby Sterling<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

The Dutch antitrust regulator on Monday issued a sixth weekly fine of 5 million euro ($5.7 million) against Apple for failure to comply with an order to open its App Store to alternative forms of payment for dating apps in the Netherlands.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Sami Fathi<\/a>:<\/p>\n

In a letter obtained by MacRumors, Apple’s head of compliance, Kyle Andeer, has defended Apple’s plan and said it believes it is fully compliant with the ACM ruling and that Apple has a “consistent and longstanding commitment to compliance in each and every country in which we do business.”<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

Apple’s requirement that dating apps submit a different app binary if they wish to use a third-party payment method or redirect users to the web for in-app purchases is “a straightforward prerequisite,” according to Apple. The additional app binary ensures “that Apple complies with its legal obligations in the Netherlands while at the same time having the ability to maintain its standard terms and conditions in the rest of the world,” Apple added.<\/p>

Apple emphasized in the letter that the practice of employing an additional app binary is not complicated or costly for developers to do.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Florian Mueller<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Practically, we can ignore the difference because the bottom line is that Apple’s position is clearer than ever in light of the letter Reuters reported on earlier today. Apple genuinely believes to be acting in good faith--and I can actually see why.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

I can’t take those news of non-compliance sanctions seriously as long as the ACM, which is not just an antitrust watchdog but also has a broader responsibility for consumer protection, isn’t defending consumers against a pricing scheme under which some reportedly paid fives times more than others for the very same service.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n