Apple has formally urged the European Union to repeal or significantly revise its Digital Markets Act (DMA), arguing that the law’s requirements are disrupting product development, delaying feature rollouts, and putting user privacy and security at risk. The company’s criticism comes as the EU begins its first comprehensive review of how the DMA is working—especially given rapid advances in AI and interoperability demands. The dispute highlights tension between regulatory goals of competition and firms’ claims of operational burdens.
Which Provisions Apple Wants Repealed or Reworked
Apple objects especially to DMA’s **interoperability mandates**, which require that certain Apple-features be made compatible with third-party hardware and non-Apple software. Chief among the rules Apple finds problematic are those forcing features like live translation via AirPods, iPhone-to-Mac / iPhone-mirroring on non-Apple devices, and location-based features in Apple Maps to operate interoperably with non-Apple products. Apple says engineering these for external hardware is complex, time-consuming, and may compromise data protection.
Another piece is the DMA’s rules around “alternative app marketplaces” and “sideloading”. The law requires Apple to allow apps to be downloaded outside its App Store and permit alternative payment systems. Apple claims this opens up risks like malware, scam apps, and inconsistent app review standards; it argues that some app marketplaces may not meet the same privacy, review, or quality thresholds that its own App Store imposes.
Apple also takes issue with the so-called “Core Technology Fee (CTF)” and related business-terms changes required by the DMA. Under DMA-compliance plans, developers must choose between legacy terms or new ones with altered fee structures. Apple argues that some of these fee changes and required disclosures impose unfair burdens on developers, distort incentives, and reduce flexibility.
Finally, Apple is pushing back on certain obligations around data sharing, transparency, and enforcement under the DMA. It suggests that the current framework—managed by the European Commission—may reject Apple’s proposed safeguards for data privacy and user security. Apple has proposed alternative regulatory mechanisms, including possibly enforcement via an independent agency rather than purely through the Commission.
Why Apple Is Making This Attempt Now
In its formal submission to the Commission, Apple frames its push to repeal or significantly reform the DMA as a response to what it sees as unintended negative consequences now affecting EU users and its own engineering operations. The delays in launching new features in Europe are central to its complaint: features available already in other markets—Live Translation on AirPods, iPhone mirroring, advanced Maps enhancements—are postponed in the EU. Apple says it cannot release them unless they operate on non-Apple hardware in ways compatible with the DMA, and that doing so without compromising privacy or system security has proved difficult.
Apple argues the pressure is now acute because the DMA predates many recent technology trends—especially AI, which demands high performance, localized data handling, and tight control over hardware/software integration. It claims the law, as currently enforced, is not flexible enough to keep up with those trends. Also, because Apple’s ecosystem is very tightly controlled (hardware + software integration + cross-device features), the requirements the DMA places upon it are more difficult to satisfy without redesigning core parts of its systems.
Beyond technical reasons, Apple sees economic and competitive incentives. The DMA forces changes to Apple’s monetization model through app marketplace rules, payment processing options, and fee-structures. These affect revenue, relationships with developers, and how Apple positions its hardware/software control. Apple claims the current framework inhibits investment and innovation by increasing compliance costs and engineering complexity.
Regulatory timing matters: the EU is currently conducting the first review of the DMA’s effectiveness since it took effect. Apple’s feedback in that consultation seeks to influence that review. It hopes to persuade legislators and regulators that repeal or major amendment is needed, or that enforcement should be adjusted to make rules more workable without undermining privacy or security.
How the DMA Rules Impact the Tech Industry
The Digital Markets Act was designed to curb the powers of so-called “gatekeepers”—large tech platforms and ecosystems that control access to essential tools or marketplaces. Its goals include boosting competition, lowering user lock-in, opening up ecosystems, and giving consumers more choice. However, for companies like Apple, whose business model depends heavily on integrated hardware/software ecosystems, these rules represent a fundamental challenge.
For developers, the rules around alternative app stores and payment systems change the economics of distributing apps. Some apps will now incur different fees depending on distribution path; some developers argue that the new terms reduce margins, impose extra compliance burdens, and complicate app discovery and trust. Emerging or smaller developers may face greater costs or difficulties meeting the review, notarization, or security requirements needed in alternative marketplaces.
For hardware and peripheral manufacturers, the interoperability rules open both opportunities and risks. On the opportunity side, non-Apple headphones, smartwatches, or other accessories might now integrate more deeply with Apple devices. But Apple warns that allowing third-party devices access to sensitive system functionality may make user data vulnerable, complicate testing, increase liability risks, and require more engineering to preserve security across devices.
From a consumer experience perspective, the impact is mixed. On one hand, consumers in Europe may get more choice: using non-Apple apps, alternative payment systems, sideloading, cross-device compatibility. On the other hand, Apple contends that quality, clarity, and consistency may decline—users might have multiple marketplaces with varying review standards, confusing interfaces, and less certainty about app origins or support in case something goes wrong.
Finally, regulatory risk and compliance costs are rising for all tech firms deemed gatekeepers under the DMA. Even non-Apple firms must adapt their business models, data handling, interface design, and privacy and security assurances. For companies outside the EU, compliance means more engineering, legal work, and monitoring of enforcement. Fines under DMA are significant, up to a percent of global turnover. Thus, the DMA is reshaping strategic planning, product rollout schedules, and even where innovation investment occurs.
Broader Implications and Tensions Ahead
Apple’s call for repeal or major reform has put Brussels in an uneasy position. EU officials insist the DMA aims to enforce baseline commitments to fairness, competition, and consumer protection. They counter that Apple already accepted many obligations, including making changes to the App Store, Safari, iOS, and hardware compatibility. Regulators say ensuring compliance will sometimes delay features, but argue that is part of implementing sweeping regulatory change.
The tension reflects a bigger debate over how to regulate Big Tech: whether regulation should enforce open ecosystems even if that introduces complexity or risk, or whether companies should be allowed more control to protect security, privacy and user experience. Apple’s stance appeals to users worried about privacy, choice, and security, but it also emphasizes stability, consistency, and its ecosystem’s design integrity.
Industry players besides Apple are watching closely. Other gatekeepers need to assess whether they also face similar burdens under DMA compliance, and whether reforms Apple seeks—if granted—might become precedents. Smaller developers and alternative marketplace operators may welcome many of the DMA’s rules, but also worry if carve-outs or watered-down enforcement tilt the field back toward the large incumbents.
With technology evolving (especially AI, voice interfaces, cross-device applications), the rules’ rigidity may either force innovation to adapt—or discourage firms from launching features at all in the EU. Apple’s push to replace or repeal DMA, or to shift enforcement to an independent regulatory body, could mark a turning point if regulators decide the law needs updating to reflect new tech realities.
(Source:www.inc.com)
Which Provisions Apple Wants Repealed or Reworked
Apple objects especially to DMA’s **interoperability mandates**, which require that certain Apple-features be made compatible with third-party hardware and non-Apple software. Chief among the rules Apple finds problematic are those forcing features like live translation via AirPods, iPhone-to-Mac / iPhone-mirroring on non-Apple devices, and location-based features in Apple Maps to operate interoperably with non-Apple products. Apple says engineering these for external hardware is complex, time-consuming, and may compromise data protection.
Another piece is the DMA’s rules around “alternative app marketplaces” and “sideloading”. The law requires Apple to allow apps to be downloaded outside its App Store and permit alternative payment systems. Apple claims this opens up risks like malware, scam apps, and inconsistent app review standards; it argues that some app marketplaces may not meet the same privacy, review, or quality thresholds that its own App Store imposes.
Apple also takes issue with the so-called “Core Technology Fee (CTF)” and related business-terms changes required by the DMA. Under DMA-compliance plans, developers must choose between legacy terms or new ones with altered fee structures. Apple argues that some of these fee changes and required disclosures impose unfair burdens on developers, distort incentives, and reduce flexibility.
Finally, Apple is pushing back on certain obligations around data sharing, transparency, and enforcement under the DMA. It suggests that the current framework—managed by the European Commission—may reject Apple’s proposed safeguards for data privacy and user security. Apple has proposed alternative regulatory mechanisms, including possibly enforcement via an independent agency rather than purely through the Commission.
Why Apple Is Making This Attempt Now
In its formal submission to the Commission, Apple frames its push to repeal or significantly reform the DMA as a response to what it sees as unintended negative consequences now affecting EU users and its own engineering operations. The delays in launching new features in Europe are central to its complaint: features available already in other markets—Live Translation on AirPods, iPhone mirroring, advanced Maps enhancements—are postponed in the EU. Apple says it cannot release them unless they operate on non-Apple hardware in ways compatible with the DMA, and that doing so without compromising privacy or system security has proved difficult.
Apple argues the pressure is now acute because the DMA predates many recent technology trends—especially AI, which demands high performance, localized data handling, and tight control over hardware/software integration. It claims the law, as currently enforced, is not flexible enough to keep up with those trends. Also, because Apple’s ecosystem is very tightly controlled (hardware + software integration + cross-device features), the requirements the DMA places upon it are more difficult to satisfy without redesigning core parts of its systems.
Beyond technical reasons, Apple sees economic and competitive incentives. The DMA forces changes to Apple’s monetization model through app marketplace rules, payment processing options, and fee-structures. These affect revenue, relationships with developers, and how Apple positions its hardware/software control. Apple claims the current framework inhibits investment and innovation by increasing compliance costs and engineering complexity.
Regulatory timing matters: the EU is currently conducting the first review of the DMA’s effectiveness since it took effect. Apple’s feedback in that consultation seeks to influence that review. It hopes to persuade legislators and regulators that repeal or major amendment is needed, or that enforcement should be adjusted to make rules more workable without undermining privacy or security.
How the DMA Rules Impact the Tech Industry
The Digital Markets Act was designed to curb the powers of so-called “gatekeepers”—large tech platforms and ecosystems that control access to essential tools or marketplaces. Its goals include boosting competition, lowering user lock-in, opening up ecosystems, and giving consumers more choice. However, for companies like Apple, whose business model depends heavily on integrated hardware/software ecosystems, these rules represent a fundamental challenge.
For developers, the rules around alternative app stores and payment systems change the economics of distributing apps. Some apps will now incur different fees depending on distribution path; some developers argue that the new terms reduce margins, impose extra compliance burdens, and complicate app discovery and trust. Emerging or smaller developers may face greater costs or difficulties meeting the review, notarization, or security requirements needed in alternative marketplaces.
For hardware and peripheral manufacturers, the interoperability rules open both opportunities and risks. On the opportunity side, non-Apple headphones, smartwatches, or other accessories might now integrate more deeply with Apple devices. But Apple warns that allowing third-party devices access to sensitive system functionality may make user data vulnerable, complicate testing, increase liability risks, and require more engineering to preserve security across devices.
From a consumer experience perspective, the impact is mixed. On one hand, consumers in Europe may get more choice: using non-Apple apps, alternative payment systems, sideloading, cross-device compatibility. On the other hand, Apple contends that quality, clarity, and consistency may decline—users might have multiple marketplaces with varying review standards, confusing interfaces, and less certainty about app origins or support in case something goes wrong.
Finally, regulatory risk and compliance costs are rising for all tech firms deemed gatekeepers under the DMA. Even non-Apple firms must adapt their business models, data handling, interface design, and privacy and security assurances. For companies outside the EU, compliance means more engineering, legal work, and monitoring of enforcement. Fines under DMA are significant, up to a percent of global turnover. Thus, the DMA is reshaping strategic planning, product rollout schedules, and even where innovation investment occurs.
Broader Implications and Tensions Ahead
Apple’s call for repeal or major reform has put Brussels in an uneasy position. EU officials insist the DMA aims to enforce baseline commitments to fairness, competition, and consumer protection. They counter that Apple already accepted many obligations, including making changes to the App Store, Safari, iOS, and hardware compatibility. Regulators say ensuring compliance will sometimes delay features, but argue that is part of implementing sweeping regulatory change.
The tension reflects a bigger debate over how to regulate Big Tech: whether regulation should enforce open ecosystems even if that introduces complexity or risk, or whether companies should be allowed more control to protect security, privacy and user experience. Apple’s stance appeals to users worried about privacy, choice, and security, but it also emphasizes stability, consistency, and its ecosystem’s design integrity.
Industry players besides Apple are watching closely. Other gatekeepers need to assess whether they also face similar burdens under DMA compliance, and whether reforms Apple seeks—if granted—might become precedents. Smaller developers and alternative marketplace operators may welcome many of the DMA’s rules, but also worry if carve-outs or watered-down enforcement tilt the field back toward the large incumbents.
With technology evolving (especially AI, voice interfaces, cross-device applications), the rules’ rigidity may either force innovation to adapt—or discourage firms from launching features at all in the EU. Apple’s push to replace or repeal DMA, or to shift enforcement to an independent regulatory body, could mark a turning point if regulators decide the law needs updating to reflect new tech realities.
(Source:www.inc.com)
