AppleInsider StaffThe European Commission said this week that Apple has yet to respond to its concerns over anti-competitive pricing of songs on its iTunes Store, despite a midnight deadline on Monday.
Shoppers are often forced to buy only from their home store, preventing them from earning the best rate. British shoppers are particularly hurt by this, the European Commission said, as the 79p song downloads were the most expensive across the whole region.
An executive for the European Commission confirmed to Thomson Financial that its charges do not allege Apple is in a dominant market position. The matter also does not concern Apple's use of its proprietary Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology on songs sold through its European iTunes shops.
For its part, Apple has claimed no wrongdoing and asserted that it had been pressured into using only localized stores by the major recording labels.
"Apple has always wanted to operate a single, pan-European iTunes store, accessible by anyone from any member state," an Apple's spokesman previously told the press. "But we were advised by the music labels and publishers that there were certain legal limits to the rights they could grant us. We do not believe the company did anything to violate EU law, and we will continue to work with the EU to resolve this matter."
According to Thomson Financial, the commission can fine companies up to 10 percent of their annual worldwide turnover for breaching EU antitrust rules.
Andrew Orr
Christine McKee
Sponsored Content
Wesley Hilliard
Amber Neely
22 Comments
Come on Kasper. These Digg-its are annoying.
It's board spamming pure and simple. It almost makes one want to just wait until AppleInsider's content shows up on MacRumors to read about it.
The European Comission had better weigh its words and actions carefully. They're dealing with a special group here - the European Apple faithfull.
If they don't play fair we shall storm their citadels in Brussels and Strasbourg and DESTROY THEM!
OK, try 'faithful' with one 'L'
Come on Kasper. These Digg-its are annoying.
It's board spamming pure and simple. It almost makes one want to just wait until AppleInsider's content shows up on MacRumors to read about it.
OK. This is not the proper forum to be discussing this matter. However, in an effort to get the conversations here back on track, here's the deal with the diggs:
I for one am not a big fan of digg. I believe its algorithms and methods to be seriously flawed and easily manipulated. Genuinely decent stories are often overshadowed by craftily-titled rants and rumors. Additionally, the first publication to break a story is often not the one left standing in the end. The rush amongst 'publishers' to 'digg' things in a hurry, I believe, also has an adverse affect on quality. And, as we've just seen, it's also disrupting online communities such as this one.
On the other hand, digg remains popular. While I've stopped using it, millions of others do. And should AppleInsider not participate -- in some way -- its stories would easily be picked up (rehashed) and dugg by another publication. So it's kind of a catch 22. Therefore, if Andrew feels like taking the time to submit the diggs, then post the links, I don't think that should be grounds for banning.
HOWEVER, going forward, we'll require that users posting digg links to AI articles also contribute to the discussion alongside the links (in the same post). Users can also continue to make posts with just the digg link if they so desire, but those posts will be deleted relatively quickly and the associated digg link moved up into the AppleInsider source posting as was the case in the past.
This way, users are free to post digg links but can't increase their post count and annoy other community members in the process.
Fair?
Best,
K
The EU knows this isn't Apple's choice--they've even said so. The labels dictate this. And the labels may even be telling the truth that prior legal agreements REQUIRE the multiple stores.
I don't know whose bluff this is to call--but it's not Apple's.