> Why would Apple have to endure this burden.

The same reason they endure the burden of safety certification and employment requirements: it’s the law. It’s not exactly a new concept.

▲

NewsaHackO 5 days ago | parent [-]

Saying something is the law is never a valid argument in discussions like this. There has been multiple historic examples of things being the law until everyone realized how unethical the original law really was.

	▲	kergonath 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yes, but for now that's the law. So, the pragmatic answer is: they have to do it because otherwise their stuff will be pulled from the shelves and they will be fined. This does not prevent them from discussing with the Commission, which they are already doing, or lobbying for changes in the regulations, which their are also already doing within the limits of the political system.
	▲	dns_snek 5 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It's not an argument, it's a factual answer. Apple has to comply with the law. And yes, it also happens to be a good law that promotes competition and curbs anti-competitive abuses.