this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
150 points (100.0% liked)

Buy European

5570 readers
809 users here now

Overview:

The community to discuss buying European goods and services.


Matrix Chat


Rules:

  • Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. No direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments.

  • Do not use this community to promote Nationalism/Euronationalism. This community is for discussing European products/services and news related to that. For other topics the following might be of interest:

  • Include a disclaimer at the bottom of the post if you're affiliated with the recommendation.

  • No russian suggestions.

Feddit.uk's instance rules apply:

  • No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia or xenophobia
  • No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies
  • No harassment, dogpiling or doxxing of other users
  • Do not share intentionally false or misleading information
  • Do not spam or abuse network features.
  • Alt accounts are permitted, but all accounts must list each other in their bios.
  • No generative AI content

Benefits of Buying Local:

local investment, job creation, innovation, increased competition, more redundancy.

European Instances

Lemmy:

Matrix:


Related Communities:

Buy Local:

Continents:

European:

Buying and Selling:

Boycott:

Countries:

Companies:

Stop Publisher Kill Switch in Games Practice:


Banner credits: BYTEAlliance


founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] huppakee@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Maybe i should have copy and pasted their follow-up comment as well:

Well, it's sufficient. Using larger calibres for the opening salvo would increase the risk of companies succeeding in fighting fines before court, and companies generally have some kind of creative interpretation of the law at the ready to justify what they're doing. Fining companies into bankruptcy or out of competition for a first offence is rather hard to justify, for repeat offenders, though? Companies continuing their behaviour after having received a warning fine have no excuse, now the gloves come off otherwise you're perceived as a paper tiger.

I think their point is that giving a small fine the first time is enough reason for them to change their behaviour because they know they could get a much higher fine (for example $40 Bn). I don't know how true this is, didn't research it, but it sounds plausible.

[โ€“] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 day ago

That's pretty much it. At first you get slapped on the wrist and if you just treat it as a cost of doing business without any changes you'll soon find out that it's not a one time fee, nor that it stays the same. I think with GPDR the maximum (one time) fee was up to 10% of companys turnover (not gross profit). With Apples ~390 billion revenue that would roughly round up to 40 billion per fine.

And even if you have endless supply of money there's still options to shut the whole business down if it's deemed illegal. It might be a damn slow process, but if you just stubbornly try to fight it with lawyers and money it just doesn't work.

[โ€“] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And yet we keep seeing the same headlines over and over. Maybe putting one's head on a pike would be a more effective deterrent - it's worth a shot.

[โ€“] Szewek@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The heads are outside the EU's jurisdiction. But I would like to see the EU showing it has the power to limit a company's activities on the common market if they do not follow the rules (idk how exactly, I guess hard bans would be very, very difficult to implement in this case).

[โ€“] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Or maybe just one of those ~~$4~~ $40 BN fines