Apple and Google Restrate Eu Crackdown: “bad for users” and “consumer harm”

Google and Apple were released with a slap on the wrist from the European Commission for its failure to comply with the European Union’s digital market law, which was designed to prevent technology giants from misuse their dominant sites in the industry.

Among the European Union resolutions on Wednesday, the immediate effects of Google than Apple. Committee Initial results released After investigating whether Google Search preferred to promote private company services, such as shopping or travel, competitors, and whether the Google Play store prevents application developers from directing people to other channels to take advantage of the best offers.

On both charges, the committee said that Google fails to comply with DMA, which means that it can be in a row with a fine of 10 % of its annual global rotation. “Both practitioners negatively affect many European and non -European companies that depend on Google or Google Play to reach its users in the European Union,” she said, “Evp for Technical Sovereignty,” who negatively affects many European and non -European companies that depend on Google or Google Play to reach its users in the European Union, “said Henna Virkkunen, EVP.

When it comes to Apple, the Committee Exposed directives Regarding how the company desires to make products belonging to external-smart hours, for example-operating with iOS and iPados. He said that the goal is to give people in Europe more more products they can buy and that will be compatible with iPhone and iPad devices.

“The effective inter -operation of the devices connected to external parties is an important step towards opening the Apple’s ecosystem,” EVP, EVP, told the European Union for fair, fair and competitive transition in a statement. “This will choose the best for consumers in the fast -growing market for innovative connected devices.”

Through the Atlantic tensions

The discussion is the best for consumers at the heart of the conflict between the American technology giants and European DMA. The European Union argues that more selection and inter -operation will always be better, while Apple and Google argue that the rules are risks of security and the ability to afford costs in a way that negatively affects people who use their services.

in Blog postGoogle has explained the ways that the European Union’s decision will hurt “European companies and consumers, hinder innovation, weaken security and reduce product quality.” He used an example of people who end up with more expensive flight tickets when he sends them through intermediate services instead of airline sites directly. The company also indicated that by allowing application developers to direct people outside their applications, Google cannot protect them from malicious or malicious links.

“Today’s decisions are committed to us in the red tape, which slows the ability of Apple to innovate users in Europe and force us to abandon our new features for free for companies that do not have to play with the same rules,” the company said in a statement. To the foot. “It is bad for our European products and users.”

Grace Nelson, an analyst at ASSEBLY Research, said that the Atlantic tensions are at the “highest levels ever” at the present time, as the committee’s actions feel “bolder” even six months ago six months ago.

“The initial results on the domination of Google, both with regard to Google and Google Play research, are well compatible with the positions of organizers all over the world, including with the US Federal Trade Committee where aggressive treatments are followed in a lawsuit against Google hanging before the courts now,” she said.

Meanwhile, she added, in Apple, the company has long argued that its “Wall Garden” approach to security is the best way to ensure privacy and safety for its users. “With the focus on the European Union more on its global security and the importance of the greatest technology sovereignty, I can see how they have weighing inter -operation and openness more than one form of security that was fully defined and controlled by a US -based company.”