{"id":42320,"date":"2024-03-04T17:26:59","date_gmt":"2024-03-04T22:26:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=42320"},"modified":"2024-03-14T15:32:56","modified_gmt":"2024-03-14T19:32:56","slug":"thoughts-on-apples-dma-compliance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2024\/03\/04\/thoughts-on-apples-dma-compliance\/","title":{"rendered":"Thoughts on Apple’s DMA Compliance"},"content":{"rendered":"

Juli Clover<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Spotify, Epic Games, Deezer, Paddle, and several other developers and EU associations today sent a joint letter<\/a> to the European Commission to complain about Apple’s “proposed scheme for compliance” with the Digital Markets Act (DMA).<\/p>

The 34 companies and associations do not believe Apple’s plans “meet the law’s requirements.” Apple’s changes “disregard both the spirit and letter of the law” and if left unchanged, will “make a mockery of the DMA,” according to the letter. Several specific components of Apple’s plan are highlighted, including the Core Technology Fee, the Notarization process, and the terms that developers must accept.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Juli Clover<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Apple today published a whitepaper [PDF<\/a>] detailing the privacy and security protections that it is implementing in the European Union to keep users as safe as possible while also complying with the requirements of the Digital Markets Act.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

Apple says that it has received numerous emails from European users and government agencies that are concerned with the risks of alternative app marketplaces, and Apple promises to “work tirelessly” to protect users “to the extent possible under the law.” There is no way for users to opt out of the DMA changes, and Apple suggests that some people may have to use alternative apps against their will. Employers and schools may require an app that is only available through a marketplace, for example.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

The e-mails to Tim Cook from concerned users show how successful Apple’s marketing has been.<\/p>\n\n

Steven Sinofsky<\/a>:<\/p>\n

This is precisely what is known and for me it is frustrating that people keep saying security and privacy are not risks or problems. As one example, Apple highlights that Google strongly discourages side loading for “important” accounts on Android. My view: all accounts are important and that is the iPhone value proposition being attacked by the DMA. We have lost choice not gained choice. An ecosystem is only as strong as the weakest link and weakening it on purpose is anti-choice, anti-privacy, anti-security.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

For me, it is frustrating that people keep assuming that security and privacy are not<\/em> risks or problems with Apple’s App Store. Why should we believe that Apple’s intentions<\/em> are the reality today and its FUD<\/em> will be the reality tomorrow?<\/p>\n\n

Google is not a neutral observer. It obviously has its own interest in discouraging sideloading—while still trying to make sideloaded apps secure<\/a>. There does not seem to be an epidemic of Android users being forced to sideload harmful apps.<\/p>\n\n

The “choice” rhetoric only makes sense with his framing that iOS and Android are roughly equivalent except that one is safe and one is open, which I don’t think is the case at all. The space of comparison points is multi-dimensional. The DMA doesn’t change the fact that we get to “choose” from essentially two package deals. It just slightly changes what’s in one of them.<\/p>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n