[akira2501]

Attempting to enforce an "illegal" contract provision seems pretty "emotional" to me. Apple is finally in a position to lose their monopoly grip on a platform software store, and they clearly will stop at nothing to stop the loss of that revenue, this is obviously an existential problem for them.

[lxgr]

It certainly threatens their app store revenue, and by extension market value, so it's rational for them to push back, but by no means is it an "existential problem". Apple is quite a bit more than just the app store.

There's probably risks on both sides here, too: Playing hardball with EU regulators and courts could cost them a lot of money.

[akira2501]

> so it's rational for them to push back

If your vision for your company only extends to the next quarterly earnings report, sure, it's "rational."

If you consider the fact that every other participant in the market dislikes this practice, that this dislike has finally risen to the level of government involvement, and that laws are about to be written taking it away from you, then clutching it to your chest is best understood as an emotional position.

It's rooted in a desire to not lose the past while attempting to deny that any other future could possibly exist. It's classic denial, on a trillion dollar corporate level.

[lxgr]

I fully agree that what they’re doing now is absurd and way too much. But no resistance at all might expose them to shareholder action in the US.

Still, about 10% of the pushback they’ve been showing so far would have probably been plenty.