In 2019, the Spotify filed a complaint with the European Commission against Apple. The complaint was about rules and fees developers must pay Apple when in-app payments or subscriptions are involved. Spotify has to pay the Apple a percentage of any subscriptions secured through Apple’s App Store, which effectively makes a Spotify subscription more expensive. In particular when the consumer signs up through an iPhone or iPad than through the Spotify’s website. This additional premium was nicknamed ‘Apple Store Tax’.
It is worth mentioning that Apple faced legal challenges in other parts of the world regarding its enforcement policy of in-app purchases. In the Netherlands, company was fined a significant amount after failing to adhere to an order to permit dating apps to use alternative payment systems. However, this issue was later resolved when Apple made concessions and allowed for alternatives. India’s competition regulator also imposed similar scrutiny on Apple’s IAP.
In a recent update, the EU antitrust regulator is seeking more information on Apple’s mobile payment system, specifically regarding accusations of restricting rivals’access to its Near-Field Communication technology. This request for information comes three months after Apple defended itself at a hearing. Even when the EC reaches a final decision, there will likely be a lengthy appeals process where Apple will fight its corner. The Commission can impose a fine of up to 10% of Apple’s global turnover. Depending on how the case unfolds, Apple may even have to remove contractual obligations with developers, allowing companies like Spotify to link from their iPhone apps to subscription portals elsewhere.
The European Commission is set to introduce a legislative initiative to make content-heavy platforms contribute to the cost of telecom networks before the end of the year. Broad coalition of stakeholders has come together to publicly warn against introducing network fees
Earlier in February, the European Commission launched a consultation on the Connectivity Package. It includes a consultation on the idea of a ‘fair share’, which would require large traffic generators to pay a contribution. This has prompted concerns from several sectors and interest groups due to the potential violation of the net neutrality principle, as it could be based on putting specific conditions on certain large traffic generators.
The EU’s effort in area, comes after large telecom operators pointing out how they are continuously asked to invest in upgrading their networks’ capacity whilst a handful of tech companies reap most of the economic benefits. The EU’s copyright rules are somewhat of a blueprint for the senders-pay initiative, as they set a precedent in trying to redistribute revenues generated in the digital economy with regulatory intervention.
This statement is signed by NGOs, rightsholders, broadband service providers, cloud associations, and Wikimedia. The signatories consider the harm to consumers would come from the fact that the network contribution would be passed on to them, whilst their choice will be reduced as content companies will have less money to invest and distribute new content.
As noted in their statement: ‘this is an unprecedented alliance of stakeholders all united against one principle: introducing a mandatory network fee, or “fair share” contribution’
The Connectivity Package report included a preliminary assessment of the impact of the proposal for direct payments to content providers to certain telecom operators. The report concluded that the proposed model would have a negative impact on the functioning of the Internet economy, and that the proposed model would be likely to distort competition in the telecom market.
The European Parliament is set to vote on a new regulation on markets in crypto-assets (MiCA). This landmark legislation is the most sophisticated set of crypto market rules yet, and comes at a time when the United States has yet to establish a concrete belief with a roadmap on crypto regulation. The MiCA regulation is aimed at placing harmonized rules for crypto assets at the EU level, and is designed to provide legal certainty for crypto assets not covered by existing EU legislation. It also has the added benefit of promoting innovation and use of crypto assets and combatting money laundering.
Parliament voted by 517 in favour and 38 against to approve the world’s first comprehensive set of regulations for issuing and trading cryptoassets such as bitcoin cryptocurrency. EU states have already given the nod to the rules, which will be rolled out from mid 2024, requiring firms that issue and trade cryptoassets to be licensed by a national regulator, giving them a ‘passport’ to serve customers across the 27-member country bloc.
The regulation will oblige crypto-asset providers to hold a license, issued by a competent authority of a member state. The license will be valid in all EU member states. To get licensed, a crypto-asset provider will have to comply with common regulatory and supervisory rules. Major service providers will have to disclose their energy consumption, and the international ‘travel rule’ already used in traditional financial transactions will be applied, meaning information on the source and recipient of the cryotoasset will have to accompany and be stored on both sides of the transfer to help combat money laundering.
Overall, the MiCA regulation is set to provide a safe and secure framework for crypto asset trading within the EU. It will promote innovation and use of crypto assets, whilst also providing legal certainty and combatting money laundering.
