"not [...] interfere with [...] Ad-Hoc distribution, or the Program [...]"

Obviously his email was an interference with the "Program" (Apple Developer Program). It probably had consumed an Apple employee's time, or that of an AI.

Imagine the EU or any government being in the position of saying to Apple: "You did not adhere to our terms xyz, therefore we terminate our granted permission for you to operate in this region. Please remove all tools you use to operate in this region and release the premises for other companies to use them, immediately", without explaining why. Because this is what Apple is doing.

▲

zimpenfish 12 hours ago | parent [-]

> Imagine the EU or any government being in the position of saying to Apple: "You did not adhere to our terms xyz, therefore we terminate our granted permission for you to operate in this region.

Isn't that literally what the EU is doing with the DMA?

	▲	pjc50 11 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yes, but you cut off the critical words "without explaining why". And such decisions are subject to court review. Really what people want is "judicial review for TOS bans", which I can see huge benefits to but it's also very expensive.
	▲	justinclift 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		No, the EU have given them warnings with detailed explanation about what needs to change, and substantial timeframes to get the changes done.
	▲	qwertox 12 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Certainly not.