Because DMA was designed not to be explicit so relies on interpretation.
But my point is that you can't say "just comply with the law" when compliance has been a much more interactive process.
In Apple's case, the edict was to create competition by opening up the app stores. Apple "opened" its app store in a way that failed to actually allow competition and so it is subject to the fine. This is exactly why laws work this way - to prevent what is now called "gaming" the system.
It’s a law that establishes no measurable compliance guidelines, while providing absolutely no limitations on what the EU can decide counts as a violation retroactively. It’s basically “We’re not going to tell you what we want you to do. You need to guess what we want you to do, and fuck you if you guess wrong.”
You may think you are defending Apple, but in truth you are just saying they are horribly incompetent. If that is the case, they deserve to keep being fined.
My comment was about how under the EU's framework, Apple's behavior is totally rational. If Apple complies more than necessary, it could cost them far more than the fine, so obviously they undershoot compliance, accept the fine, and then proceed with minimal compliance. If the commission were simply upfront with about specifics of compliance, it could all be avoided.
They think they’re above the fray, but there’s a reason Google and Meta are taking DMA way more seriously than GDPR - it’s basically a speedboat loaded with explosives in regulatory terms.
It’s designed to move fast and take out targets with extreme prejudice. It is crafted to explicitly overcome the barriers that prevent GDPR being enforced (eg Ireland).
Apple is fucking around with the EU, and will very shortly find out why the DMA is written the way it is.
When Apple stops selling their shitty hardware here, can they take home Google and Facebook too?
There are 450 million people in the EU, nobody thinks Apple is just going to casually walk away.
Aka never. First off because they would get shredded by their investors, and second because the competitors emerging in that void would end up being threats in the future.