The only being ridiculous here is Apple. DMA is fairly clear and reasonable in what it wants to achieve. It's Apple that is trying different ways of not complying with it.
There is no "back and forth". The EU is not negotiating with Apple. Laws are not up for negotiation after they've been passed. This is the whole issue here - Apple thinks they're at a corporate negotiation table, but they're not. Laws that are in effect are meant to be followed - it's a one-way process.
> The EU is not negotiating with Apple. Laws are not up for negotiation after they've been passed.
??? Of course they are what are you talking about? Hell even criminal law is up for negotiation some 90%+ of the time with plea deals and DA's declining to prosecute certain crimes. It is unfathomable to me that you can look around and not see regulators working with companies to meet the company's business objectives and the regulator's compliance goals.
And of course this is the case, regulators would rather not spend time and resources suing and so will give more liberal
interpretations of the law in exchange for the company willingly following it. It's the solution to the iterated regulators dilemma— if you have no give then companies will fight you at every step and make you spend years in court for the smallest things.
There is no "back and forth". The EU is not negotiating with Apple. Laws are not up for negotiation after they've been passed. This is the whole issue here - Apple thinks they're at a corporate negotiation table, but they're not. Laws that are in effect are meant to be followed - it's a one-way process.