LONDON — The European Union unveiled measures that compel Apple to make its iPhone and iPad operating systems more compatible with competing technologies. This development marks the first instance of the EU employing its Digital Markets Act (DMA) to enforce compliance among major tech companies.
The DMA, an extensive set of regulations implemented to break the monopoly of Big Tech “gatekeepers,” came into effect a year ago. Following this, the EU promptly initiated a series of investigations targeting these large technology firms. In September, specific proceedings commenced to clearly specify Apple’s obligations under the DMA, which endeavors to dismantle exclusive tech ecosystems that limit consumer choice to a single company’s products.
A legally binding decree from the European Commission outlined steps Apple needs to undertake regarding nine connectivity attributes within the iOS system. These measures aim to improve interoperability by allowing device and app developers enhanced access to iPhone functionalities. Examples include the ability for iPhone users to receive notifications on non-Apple smartwatches and reply to communication, as well as better integration with wireless headphones from other brands.
The decision highlighted providing developers external access to Apple’s wireless file transfer technology, encouraging the creation of apps akin to the AirDrop feature. Additionally, the commission proposed increased transparency in how software developers can request access to iPhone features, improving availability of technical documentation that was previously restricted.
In the statement, Teresa Ribera, the European Commission Executive Vice President, emphasized that the ruling would provide regulatory clarity for both Apple and developers. “Effective interoperability” is expected to offer consumers more choices within the rapidly expanding market of connected devices, she added.
Welcoming the decision, BEUC, a European consumer advocacy, noted Apple’s long-standing restrictive practices that hinder product interoperability. However, Apple expressed dissatisfaction, suggesting that these regulations impede their ability to innovate and benefit European consumers. A company statement indicated discussions with the European Commission to address these concerns on behalf of users.
The Commission also issued a warning to Google, indicating that their current measures were insufficient in aligning with the DMA. Despite eliminating flight listings, Google continued to prioritize its services in search outcomes. Furthermore, the investigation revealed Google’s resistance to allowing app developers to guide users towards more cost-effective choices beyond the Google Play Store. The commission argued that the fees Google imposes for app downloads and transactions are excessive.
Google defended its position, arguing that the suggested amendments could complicate user searches and diminish online exposure for European businesses, considering the adjustments misguided. The commission’s findings concerning the app store were criticized as promoting a false dichotomy between openness and security and potentially exposing users in Europe to malware risks. Google retains the right to contest these findings.
Should the Commission declare Google non-compliant with the DMA, potential sanctions could entail a fine reaching 10% of the company’s global annual revenue. German officials have expressed a preference for negotiating compliance rather than imposing hefty fines.
The EU’s stringent stance on tech giants has provoked reactions from U.S. political figures, with President Donald Trump criticizing the bloc’s substantial antitrust fines on American companies. Vice-President JD Vance also objected to overreaching AI regulations, indirectly opposing the EU’s comprehensive Artificial Intelligence Act.
In the United States, Apple faces an antitrust lawsuit from the Department of Justice, accusing the company of maintaining an unlawful smartphone monopoly. Concurrently, federal regulators are initiating proceedings to disassemble Google’s operations following a federal judge’s determination that Google’s search engine exploits its dominance to curtail competition and innovation.