Apple wins court battle against banks in Australia over control of Apple Pay technology

An Australian consumer watchdog has barred four banks from collectively bargaining with Apple for gaining access to the contactless payment technology used in iPhones. Four banks — Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, National Australia Bank and Bendigo and Adelaide Bank — wanted to negotiate with Apple to gain access to its payments technology used in “Apple Pay” for their own apps, avoiding having to pay fees to Apple, the BBC reported on Friday.

The banks do not allow their cards to be used with “Apple Pay” because they never reached agreement on the conditions. By collectively bargaining with the Cupertino-headquartered tech giant, these four banks wanted to convey to Apple that unless it gave them access to its iPhone technology, they would continue to prevent their customers from using Apple Pay.

In its final ruling on Friday, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said that the collective threat to boycott Apple was “likely to reduce or distort competition”. The commission said that ruling in favour of the banks would have reduced competition by forcing Apple to act more like Google, whose more open Android operating system allows contactless payments from individual apps.

“It is a tricky issue for a competition regulator to force one competitor to adopt a strategy of the other competitor,” ACCC chairman Rod Sims was quoted as saying. Meanwhile, the banks have said that they were “disappointed” by the decision and would review their future strategies. The near field communication (NFC) system used in “Apple Pay” allows users to transact by just holding their phone to a small terminal, with the money deducted from a bank card registered with Apple Pay.

Comments

Internet providers in US say that they are not going to sell their consumers’ internet browsing history

Comcast Corp, Verizon Communications Inc and AT&T Inc said Friday they would not sell customers’ individual internet browsing information, days after the US Congress approved legislation reversing Obama administration era internet privacy rules. The bill would repeal regulations adopted in October by the Federal Communications Commission under former President Barack Obama requiring internet service providers to do more to protect customers’ privacy than websites like Alphabet Inc’s Google or Facebook Inc . The easing of restrictions has sparked growing anger on social media sites. “We do not sell our broadband customers’ individual web browsing history. We did not do it before the FCC’s rules were adopted, and we have no plans to do so,” said Gerard Lewis, Comcast’s chief privacy officer. He added Comcast is revising its privacy policy to make more clear that “we do not sell our customers’ individual web browsing information to third parties.” Verizon does not sell person

The Galaxy S8's misplaced fingerprint scanner was probably a last-minute change

Ask anyone to tell you where a smartphone's fingerprint reader should be and, though the answers will vary, you'll never be told "off center, right next to the camera lens on the back." But lo and behold, that's exactly where Samsung plopped its fingerprint scanner on the new (and otherwise delightful) Galaxy S8. It's a perplexing decision if we consider it as a deliberate design choice, but reports ahead of the S8's launch, which now seem validated by the device itself, suggest that it was a last-minute alteration enforced by the slower-than-desired development of more ambitious technology. A March 13th report out of Korea lays it all out lucidly. Samsung, working in collaboration with Synaptics, had initially hoped to build the fingerprint sensing tech directly into the screen itself. "Samsung poured resources into Synaptics’ fledgling technology last year but the results were frustrating," an informed source is quoted as saying. "W

The Freedom 251 isn’t dead, it’s returned as the Freedom 420 4G feature phone for Rs 420(6.48$)

As we’re all aware by now, the Freedom 251 smartphone turned out to be a sham. The makers of the smartphone, resellers to be precise, were unable to follow through on their promise of delivering a smartphone at Rs 251 to the Indian public. Practically speaking, building such a smartphone was impossible to begin with. The bill of materials alone would place the cost of the device at over Rs 1,000 and despite claims of unnamed “partnerships” and tax breaks under the Make In India initiative, it would have been impossible to bring down the price of the smartphone and the plan fizzled out. Reality struck a harsh blow to the company and it’s offices have since been shut down. The original owners have also quietly disappeared and at least one has been arrested. It now appears that the company never gave up trying. We’ve learned that the company, now under new management, has taken a more realistic approach to the problem and have come up with yet another outrageous, but less lud

TechCruuse

Search This Blog