[DEADMINCEDOS]

> Selling your product in the EU means having an EU presence.

Ehhhhhh. Kind of. Maybe. Certainly not always.

I mean, if there is some shitty little porn company in say, California, and they make porn that say, caters to a fetish that is legal in California but illegal in the EU, well, what then?

The porn company isn't doing anything wrong, and EU laws are irrelevant. At this point they can try to firewall off the company, punish ISPs, maybe punish citizens who do business with that company, because it isn't breaking any EU laws, and has no EU presence that can be fined, sieved, etc.

This is very normal, this is the way international laws work barring treaties or other agreements to have a special arrangement outside of that.

So, if Apple pulls out of the EU, maybe they can no longer ship mail to the EU, I'm doubtful of that but let's just say. Well, there are plenty of non EU countries close by, including the UK. Not really a problem for EU citizens to get one at all, so again, the EU can only punish people, not the company.

> Like, I can’t just ship heroin to Europe from abroad and claim I’m immune.

If it was legal to do so in the sending country, sure you could. That isn't true for any country though, so it's not a great analogy.

[FireBeyond]

> So, if Apple pulls out of the EU, maybe they can no longer ship mail to the EU, I'm doubtful of that but let's just say.

Why? Apple has Customs pulling (ironically, actually genuine) Apple parts being shipped.

Customs is built around this whole model, unless what, you propose that Apple starts selling commercial quantities of iPhones by disposable drop shippers?

[DEADMINCEDOS]

Excellent point, I clearly wasn't thinking too clearly when I made that point. The main point I was thinking is that trying to stop iPhones coming in to the EU is significantly harder.

Imagine the amount of people wanking through the 'nothing to declare' exit after coming back from pretty much any other country and buying an iphone.

[immibis]

The EU could start blocking payments to that porn studio. Avoiding the block would be money laundering, which is also illegal in California. The EU (or it's constituent countries - not sure) also controls imports, and could seize and destroy illegally purchased iPhones at the border. Every one of my international purchases is already stopped and processed by customs to evaluate import taxes. It would be quite easy for them to simply say "you can't import this."

[DEADMINCE]

> The EU could start blocking payments to that porn studio.

Sure, but this is not punishing the company in any way which was the other posters point. If the EU was blocking payments to Apple after Apple withdrew from the EU, they are not punishing Apple or holding them accountable to EU law (specifically in the context of complying with competition guidelines and DMA type stuff).

> Avoiding the block would be money laundering, which is also illegal in California.

Hmmmm. I'm not so sure about that. If the EU barred payments to Apple, that block would be on banks and payment processors, not people. If someone goes to the US and buys an iPhone in this new world, they are not committing a crime unless the EU passes a law prohibiting its citizens to buy iPhones.

> The EU (or it's constituent countries - not sure) also controls imports, and could seize and destroy illegally purchased iPhones at the border. Every one of my international purchases is already stopped and processed by customs to evaluate import taxes. It would be quite easy for them to simply say "you can't import this."

Absolutely, but this has nothing to do with Apple, and it isn't the EU punishing Apple, it's Apple punishing people or organizations.

The other posters point was that if Apple withdraws from the EU, EU law wouldn't apply (in the sense they wouldn't need to allow any 3rd party app store, period), and people could still buy iPhones and Apple products outside of it. It's on the EU to try and deal with that.

[ffgjgf1]

> Ehhhhhh. Kind of. Maybe. Certainly not always

Certainly always, in the case of companies like Apple. They either lose > 95% of their sales in the EU or comply with their regulations.

> porn

Is not sold on physical media these days.

[DEADMINCE]

> Certainly always, in the case of companies like Apple.

No, lol. If Apple pulls out of the EU, they won't have any official presence, period.

> They either lose > 95% of their sales in the EU or comply with their regulations.

Or bypass them by pulling out.

> Is not sold on physical media these days.

Yeah, that was the point. Re-read the comment in context.

[ffgjgf1]

> they won't have any official presence, period.

So they’d lose 20% of their global revenue just out of spite? Can you name a single rational reason why’d they do that?

> Or bypass

How? They won’t be able to sell directly to EU customers…

> Re-read the comment in context.

It just doesn’t make any sense. Apple wouldn’t be able to sell to clients in the EU on a large scale. It just wouldn’t work due to perfectly obvious reasons.

[DEADMINCE]

> So they’d lose 20% of their global revenue just out of spite? Can you name a single rational reason why’d they do that?

If EU fines exceed EU revenue.

> How? They won’t be able to sell directly to EU customers…

The EU would have to police its own citizens from going outsize their walls and buying iPhones from literally any other country.

> It just doesn’t make any sense. Apple wouldn’t be able to sell to clients in the EU on a large scale.

So it made sense, and you understood fine, you just disagreed and decided to be obtuse about it. Sigh.

The point was simply that the EU can't touch a company in another country with no presence in the EU, even if EU citizens are buying from it.

All they can do is try and block payments to it, firewall it off, and similar things.

So sure, the EU could police its citizens buying iPhones online, but that's going to be an awful lot of work considering all the third party sellers, and I don't think it would be terribly successful. Not without enforcement which would be extremely unpopular.

[ffgjgf1]

> If EU fines exceed EU revenue

They won’t. Also you’re assuming that Apple’s management is irrational and petulant, because if not it should be “if the cost of compliance with EU regulations exceeds their EU revenue/net income” which isn’t going to be even remotely true.

> obtuse about it

Not at all. It’s just that this seems fairly obvious to me:

A very small fraction of people buying iPhones in Europe now would buy them if they had to ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support.

So sure it won’t be 100%, just 80-90% which doesn’t change anything

[DEADMINCE]

> They won’t.

You're awfully cocksure with nothing to back it up.

Apple's global revenue in 2023 was about 120 billion. EU revenue was 24 billion. DMA allows fines up to 10% of global revenue. Two max fines under the DMA is already more than their EU profit.

> Also you’re assuming that Apple’s management is irrational and petulantv

I'm not the one making an assumption here. I'm saying if x then y which is perfectly reasonable. You're saying x would *NEVER* happen, which I would consider foolish.

I think Apple will comply with the EU to a point, I agree they are not trying to leave the EU at all. But ultimately they are still a US company and follow US leadership, who may want to do things or try and circumvent EU policies in a way they think are fine, but the EU doesn't.

I mean, there was already a clash with their first fine, it won't be surprising if more come.

I also really think you are being dismissive and downplaying their decision to not enter the AI market in the EU.

> It’s just that this seems fairly obvious to me:

> A very small fraction of people buying iPhones in Europe now would buy them if they had to ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support.

> So sure it won’t be 100%, just 80-90% which doesn’t change anything

I'm so confused at what point you are making here. You're saying EU citizens, if Apple left the EU, would just, and to quote "ship them from outside the EU, pay the VAT themselves and have no warranty/support."

Is this correct? Because that has been specifically the point I was making. Jesus. My point though, to clarify again, is if they do that, Apple won't be subject to any EU rules. All those iPhones bought outside the EU won't have 3rd party app stores, for example, and the EU would be powerless to enforce that. Seriously. That's the point I made several comments ago that you decided to dispute. Which now you are making yourself?