• @shrugal@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    45 months ago

    Isn’t it the other way around? Afaik the EU commission investigates them, makes a decision, and sets a due date for Apple to comply or pay a potentially hefty fine. It would be Apple who’d have to sue against that, and they’d have to pay the fine until a court confirms or nullifies it.

    • @JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      55 months ago

      The fine will have to be pretty hefty to cancel out the risk to Apple of PWAs taking off.

      A free and open app platform sitting above the OS is surely a terrible threat to both Google and Apple.

      • @ferralcat@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        15 months ago

        Google and apple both allow pwas right now though, don’t they? I don’t think it’s a threat. It’s just apple trying to say fu to the eu. The eu will slp a billion dollar fine on them. They’ll pay it.

        • @voodooattack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          15 months ago

          A PWA running in a browser engine that they can’t control can have access to features that they can’t vet and restrict. If PWAs aren’t restricted to 50MB of storage and have near feature-parity with native apps then they’ll eventually lose the ability to enforce their revenue cut on In-App Purchases.

          Not sure how it works on android, but on iOS I’m pretty sure this means that mobile game devs will start shipping games as WebGL/WASM with asset streaming and implement their own payment channels for micro-transactions.

          Apple can’t risk it and I believe they will fight it tooth and nail to the bitter end.

      • @shrugal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        15 months ago

        Up to 10% of global revenue, 20% if they keep repeating the same offense, so nothing to sneeze at.

          • @shrugal@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            25 months ago

            Pretty much all sources as far as I understand it. The exact definition is here if you’re interested (Article 5).

            • not exceeding 10 % of the aggregate turnover of the undertaking concerned within the meaning of Article 5

              So I’m not sure what “the undertaking concerned” means exactly, but it’s probably the mobile portion of the business (and maybe just app store sales). But I guess that’s yet to be determined.

              • @shrugal@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                2
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                The article even explicitly lists subsidiaries and holdings with >50% of the ownership or voting rights, so I don’t think it’s limited to just one department or devision of a company. But yea, we’ll have to wait and see how this is applied in a real case.