Personally, I’m happy to see regulations that hold megacorps to the spirit and intent of those regulations, rather than having a dozen loopholes they can pass through. The lawyers are of course unhappy since they can’t argue in court that they met the absolute minimum letter of the law.
Thank you, this gets to the core of the problem. Exorbitant amounts of money and effort is spent to find where the letter of the law does not match the spirit of the law. Language is messy, so it never completely will. But in cases where the spirit of the law is so obvious I’m happy when it’s enforced instead of letting them off on technicalities.
Should a DMA violation be repeated, fines can reach up to 20 percent of global annual revenue.
That’s over a thousand dollars!
Throughout the past several months, Apple has made a number of changes to comply with bypass the DMA
Fixed that for them
We are confident our plan complies with the law,
It most likely doesn’t.
and estimate more than 99 percent of developers would pay the same or less in fees to Apple under the new business terms we created.
Translation: current fleecing levels will remain
All developers doing business in the EU on the App Store have the opportunity to utilize the capabilities that we have introduced, including the ability to direct app users to the web to complete purchases at a very competitive rate.
You’re still free to pay us for using the cheaper services provided by others.
As we have done routinely, we will continue to listen and engage with the European Commission.”
We’re paying close attention to find out how best to bypass the law without paying the fines
delaying the rollout of Apple Intelligence — the company’s name for a suite of generative AI features that will debut in iOS 18 — and some other features in the EU. “We are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security,” the company told Bloomberg.
Translation: they won’t let us monetize every tiny bit of data with no compensation or even notice
Fuck Apple. Fuck their walled garden profiteering bullshit. FUCK their blatant lies about it.
I know, I was just being silly for the sake of being silly on that one heh.
Fining Apple tens of billions of dollars is genuinely a great start towards making it not financially viable for them to break the law, so I’m all for it!
Conservatives want to make porn illegal, which isn’t easy under traditional means, so they’re taking the “Putin” approach as I put it, make viewing porn hard, unattractive or even dangerous and make delivering porn to people hard, unattractive and dangerous.
Requiring an ID from the government to view porn means the government can tell who is watching what. If one of those people happens to run for office or get a little too campaigny, their porn history can be named and shamed.
And porn providers know this, and know that will drive people away from their sites, and on top of this implementing this will likely be bureaucratic and likely expensive, so they’ll stop serving an area.
And when this is applied to non porn sites that have porn like Reddit or twitter or Tumblr, well guess what’s going to happen, those sites will ban porn from their site.
It’s basically banning porn by making it impossible to get porn in a way that doesn’t end up with you getting blackmailed. Children have nothing to do with it.
Google can’t even block yiff with safe search, lol. AI has incredible difficulty with evaluating furry porn. Which means that Mitch McConnell is going to live out his final days looking at anthropomorphic hyenas that could benchpress a fridge and have 11 inches of freedom, lmao.
Generations of southerners and people in the central US are going to be looking at considerable amounts of yiff if conservatives have their way.
Over the past year, Pornhub had to make the difficult decision to block access to users in numerous American states due to newly passed Age Verification laws (Texas, Utah, Arkansas, Virginia, Montana, North Carolina, Mississippi). In July 2024, we will unfortunately be blocking several more states who are introducing similar laws. (Indiana, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky and Nebraska.)
The middle-man provides plausible deniability in this case. PornHub can genuinely say they don’t see connections from age-verification states atm. That stops being true if they host the VPN, making them aware of actual client locations.
That’s a pretty red list there. Congrats to the mouthbreathers with two brain cells fighting for third place that get their porn from humping their cousins.
Pornhub is only pulling out to punish the states for trying to stand up to them. In classic American monopoly fashion they go on the attack as soon as any legislation targets them.
Pornhub claims the reason is because they dont to collect government ID but Pornhub collects user data and understands who their customers are. Adding government ID to their data would hardly be anymore of a privacy invasion and it’s not like they are forced to store it.
Imo this law is actually in a way pushing for a porn monopoly, if you by law need to provide an id, are you gonna trust some random site with that info or the big one everyone uses
OP’s claim here is just BS. PornHub is in no way a monopoly or even close. It reads like someone who has literally never searched for porn on the internet. Astroturf.
PornHub is a monopoly. They own xnxx, redtube, xhamster, and several production companies such as brazzers. Their categorization system has also had some ranging impacts on actresses’ ability to get work after they turn 22. I highly recommend listening to The Butterfly Effect by Jon Ronson.
ALSO so we’re clear, I’m not a fan of this legislation because its dumb as fuck and doesn’t help anyone, least of all sex workers. When people lose easy access to porn it usually results in WORSE conditions for sex workers because suddenly there’s more demand in places without safety infrastructure.
Can you define what part of PornHub owning a lot of other porn sites makes them a monopoly? Part of being a monopoly is being anticompetitive. What has PornHub done in terms of lobbying or other anticompetitive practices which makes it more difficult for a new company sharing porn to take hold? Because there is a ton of porn online which is unrelated to PornHub.
I’m all for calling out monopolies, but I legit don’t see one here. I’m open to being wrong.
I don’t believe that the thing about actresses getting work after 22 is reliant on PornHub. Porn has worked that way for 50+ years my dude.
No it’s not. Being hit with antitrust laws requires first being a monopoly, but the monopoly state exists merely by virtue of size within the industry.
Edit: to be clear the only point I am making here is in relation to that definition you provided. Nothing more.
Law maker enacts legislation towards a company. The company is able to comply but instead the company pulls the service or severelyndegrades it. Then when users are pissed off the company will point to the law maker and say “they forced us to do this”. The law maker then suffers the blacklash of companies service withdrawal.
Apple tried this with the EU usb c but eventually backed down. John deer tried this with right to repair. There are many cases where companies use these tactics to try and bully law makers away from regulating them and I think i know it’s legal and their right to do so but I find it gross.
I don’t think the law makers should be solving the “problem” this way but I also don’t think pornhub should deny service from an entire state because they want an an ID check implemented.
Apple tried this with the EU usb c but eventually backed down
Umm, what? Apple was always going to move to USB-C. The EU regulations at most hastened that by a couple of years. Their tablets and even laptop computers were using USB-C before the EU even enacted that legislation. It was only a matter of time.
But back on the subject at hand, this is nothing like that sort of bullying. This is a company being asked to build more infrastructure at their own expense, and then use that infrastructure to place its own users at risk. They’ve made a simple calculation that it’s better for their bottom line and their reputation to choose not to comply, and instead pull out of a few small markets.
engadget.com
Active