Comment by CharlesW
8 months ago
> I'll assume this is completely bogus, unless you elaborate.
IANAL, but here's the bit where I explained this: "…allowing an app whose primary purpose is distribution of infringing content undermines fair competition among legitimate content providers."
To elaborate on that a bit more: Apple is a DSA-designated VLOP. Articles 34–35 obligate them to respond to risks on its platform (like apps used primarily for piracy) with proportionate mitigation. That's why EU courts (if they're ever involved) will find that blocking iTorrent is unambiguously a lawful and proportionate response according to the DSA.
Not sure where you're getting that from. Firstly Apple App Store is a VLOP, not Apple as a whole. Apple shouldn't even be in the loop as a digital service to third party app stores but even if they are, it's not covered by the DSA as their notarization service doesn't constitute a "Very Large Online Platform".
Secondly, articles 34-35 say no such thing. Article 34 only calls out "the dissemination of illegal content through their services" as a systemic risk. A torrent client is not illegal content.
Article 35 lists "illegal hate speech" and "cyber violence" as pointed examples of illegal content.
> c) adapting content moderation processes, including the speed and quality of processing notices related to specific types of illegal content and, where appropriate, the expeditious removal of, or the disabling of access to, the content notified, in particular in respect of illegal hate speech or cyber violence, as well as adapting any relevant decision-making processes and dedicated resources for content moderation;