• AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    5 months ago

    John Gruber (yes, the Apple loyalist) pointed out that the Japanese law specifically exempts game consoles, and suggested the US retaliating by passing a law requiring third-party app stores on the PlayStation and Switch. Which probably won’t happen, but would be entertaining if it did.

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      its the one opening Microsoft wants. if they can manage to be able to get gamepass on the devices, itll get what it wants (more subscribers) in virtue of having more devices it is officially on.

      while i dont think it would happen, if it were thrown up in the air, companies like microsoft and epic would 100% be backing it up

  • Beaver@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    5 months ago

    Interesting line:

    “Japan’s move follows a trend of international legislative efforts aimed at regulating the dominance of major tech companies. The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the UK’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill are similar initiatives designed to foster competition and prevent monopolistic practices. Various antitrust cases in the United States are also targeting similar issues.”

        • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          5 months ago

          They won’t and they can’t do this to Japanese megacorps.

          Nintendo orders the police to raid places on the mere suspicion of rom selling.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            30
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            It’s really not. At the end of the day, they’re all consumer electronics devices with general purpose operating systems with unnecessary restrictions to enforce a monopoly on software installs.

            To be consistent, it should apply to consoles just the same as phones and tablets.

            • Yuki@kutsuya.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              Hm, I imagined it would be different since a phone these days is kinda a requirement to have (at least in this country) and a gaming console isn’t

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Whether it’s a “requirement” shouldn’t be the metric, the nature and capabilities of it should. If the device can reasonably support customer choice and competition, it should.

  • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    And elsewhere people are in defense of Vale, which is accused of tying sales, pricing clauses and excessive tarrifs.

    Good that these walled gardens are being broken open, as it not only allows for direct competition, it also required companies to think about safety and security. It is high time that apps are “containerized” and users given direct control over what is accessible to an app and what not. And if data is accessed that it is transparent what data is collected.