• progress_activity cloud_sync

    Reconnection to the server…

    Movim cannot talk with the server, please try again later

  • back_to_tab fullscreen tile_small dialpad mic videocam switch_camera screen_share

    mic_none No sound detected from your microphone


    • Public subscriptions

    • chevron_right

      coopr8

    • chevron_right

      gabagoo

    • chevron_right

      kenu_demon

    • chevron_right

      coopr8

    • chevron_right

      gabagoo

    • chevron_right

      kenu_demon

    • chevron_right

      coopr8

    • chevron_right

      gabagoo

    • chevron_right

      kenu_demon

  • Register Login

    Movim

    movim.chatterboxtown.us


  • group_work rss_feed
    add Follow

    ArsTechnica

    • Ar chevron_right

      Apple: “Hundreds of millions to billions” lost without App Store commissions

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica • 8 May 2025

    Many horses, including Spotify and Amazon's Kindle Store , have already left the barn. But Apple is moving quickly to shut the external payments door opened by last week's ruling that the company willfully failed to comply with court orders regarding anticompetitive behavior.

    In an emergency motion filing late Wednesday (PDF), Apple described US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers' "extraordinary Order" as including an injunction that "permanently precludes Apple from exercising control over core aspects of its business operations, including charging for use of its property and protecting the integrity of its platform and in-app purchase mechanism." A certificate (PDF) accompanying the emergency filing states that the order "fundamentally changes Apple's business and creates destabilizing effects" for App Store customers.

    The restrictions, "which will cost Apple substantial sums annually," are not based on the company's conduct, Apple claims, but "were imposed to punish Apple for purported non-compliance" with the 2021 injunction. In her ruling (PDF), Gonzalez Rogers described Apple as conducting an "obvious cover-up" and said that Apple "at every turn chose the most anticompetitive option."

    Read full article

    Comments

    • tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagapple tagapple tagapple tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments

    • Pictures 3 image

    • visibility
    • visibility
    • visibility
    • Ar chevron_right

      Apple: “Hundreds of millions to billions” lost without App Store commissions

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica • 8 May 2025

    Many horses, including Spotify and Amazon's Kindle Store , have already left the barn. But Apple is moving quickly to shut the external payments door opened by last week's ruling that the company willfully failed to comply with court orders regarding anticompetitive behavior.

    In an emergency motion filing late Wednesday (PDF), Apple described US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers' "extraordinary Order" as including an injunction that "permanently precludes Apple from exercising control over core aspects of its business operations, including charging for use of its property and protecting the integrity of its platform and in-app purchase mechanism." A certificate (PDF) accompanying the emergency filing states that the order "fundamentally changes Apple's business and creates destabilizing effects" for App Store customers.

    The restrictions, "which will cost Apple substantial sums annually," are not based on the company's conduct, Apple claims, but "were imposed to punish Apple for purported non-compliance" with the 2021 injunction. In her ruling (PDF), Gonzalez Rogers described Apple as conducting an "obvious cover-up" and said that Apple "at every turn chose the most anticompetitive option."

    Read full article

    Comments

    • tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagapple tagapple tagapple tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments

    • Pictures 3 image

    • visibility
    • visibility
    • visibility
    • Ar chevron_right

      Apple: “Hundreds of millions to billions” lost without App Store commissions

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica • 8 May 2025

    Many horses, including Spotify and Amazon's Kindle Store , have already left the barn. But Apple is moving quickly to shut the external payments door opened by last week's ruling that the company willfully failed to comply with court orders regarding anticompetitive behavior.

    In an emergency motion filing late Wednesday (PDF), Apple described US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers' "extraordinary Order" as including an injunction that "permanently precludes Apple from exercising control over core aspects of its business operations, including charging for use of its property and protecting the integrity of its platform and in-app purchase mechanism." A certificate (PDF) accompanying the emergency filing states that the order "fundamentally changes Apple's business and creates destabilizing effects" for App Store customers.

    The restrictions, "which will cost Apple substantial sums annually," are not based on the company's conduct, Apple claims, but "were imposed to punish Apple for purported non-compliance" with the 2021 injunction. In her ruling (PDF), Gonzalez Rogers described Apple as conducting an "obvious cover-up" and said that Apple "at every turn chose the most anticompetitive option."

    Read full article

    Comments

    • tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagapple tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagapple tagapple tagapple tagpolicy tagpolicy tagpolicy tagapp store tagapp store tagapp store tagappeal tagappeal tagappeal tagepic tagepic tagepic tagfortnite tagfortnite tagfortnite tagin-app payments tagin-app payments tagin-app payments

    • Pictures 3 image

    • visibility
    • visibility
    • visibility
  • cloud_queue

    Powered by Movim