Australia antitrust agency examining Apple's App Store policies
Australia has become the latest country to look into Apple's App Store and Google's Play Store policies, after the country's competition regulatory agency revealed it is examining the digital storefronts for antitrust behavior.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has advised it is looking into the "use and sharing of data by apps, the extent of competition between Google and Apple's app stores, and whether more pricing transparency is needed in Australia's mobile apps market" in a statement issued on Tuesday.
The work is being conducted as part of a five-year inquiry, with reports about digital platform services set to be published every six months. An issues paper released by the commission asks for views and feedback from app developers and suppliers in their dealings with the app stores, while consumers have been invited to share their experiences via a survey.
The ACCC wants views on Apple and Google's potential incentive to link or bundle their own goods and services through their app marketplaces and how they affect consumers and businesses. The ability for third-party app developers to compete against apps made by the firms controlling the stores is also being looked at, as are terms and conditions imposed on developers, the effects of fee structures, how apps are allowed or denied access to the app stores, rankings, and the potential collection of consumer data.
We want to know more about the market for mobile apps in Australia, including how transparent and effective the market is, for consumers as well as those operating in the market," said ACCC deputy chair Delia Rickard. "We will also focus on the extent of competition between the major online app stores, and how they compete for app sales with other app providers."
Submissions for the consumer and developer surveys close on October 2, with the final report concerning the opinions expected by March 2021.
Australia has become the latest country to take interest in Apple's App Store for antitrust reasons. Investigations and expressions of interest have been made or commenced by many countries, including Germany, Russia, the United States, and others.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has advised it is looking into the "use and sharing of data by apps, the extent of competition between Google and Apple's app stores, and whether more pricing transparency is needed in Australia's mobile apps market" in a statement issued on Tuesday.
The work is being conducted as part of a five-year inquiry, with reports about digital platform services set to be published every six months. An issues paper released by the commission asks for views and feedback from app developers and suppliers in their dealings with the app stores, while consumers have been invited to share their experiences via a survey.
The ACCC wants views on Apple and Google's potential incentive to link or bundle their own goods and services through their app marketplaces and how they affect consumers and businesses. The ability for third-party app developers to compete against apps made by the firms controlling the stores is also being looked at, as are terms and conditions imposed on developers, the effects of fee structures, how apps are allowed or denied access to the app stores, rankings, and the potential collection of consumer data.
We want to know more about the market for mobile apps in Australia, including how transparent and effective the market is, for consumers as well as those operating in the market," said ACCC deputy chair Delia Rickard. "We will also focus on the extent of competition between the major online app stores, and how they compete for app sales with other app providers."
Submissions for the consumer and developer surveys close on October 2, with the final report concerning the opinions expected by March 2021.
Australia has become the latest country to take interest in Apple's App Store for antitrust reasons. Investigations and expressions of interest have been made or commenced by many countries, including Germany, Russia, the United States, and others.
Comments
PS. As an encouragement to get people to buy the iPhone 12, Apple could include all of its own paid software products for free on that device only. Along with free subscriptions to its Music, TV and News services for as long as there is no App Store available for it. I would jump at that.
Rather, the ACCC has found many times in Apple's favour, the most notable and recent example being the denial of Australia's own banks from colluding against Apple Pay.
not sure why Apple should curtail or inhibit their devices when the competing Samsung mobiles do not, not convinced that doing so, however people bought, would tell anyone anything really. Some people buy for the new camera, some just because it’s new etc. Many don’t care about apps at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc. (you may need to add the trailing dot manually)
The same thing also happened with car manufacturers and dealerships. The US government told the auto industry they could not sell their own cars in their own dealerships! That's why dealerships are now independent from manufacturers. SIDENOTE: Tesla has found a loophole to this in many states by selling most of its cars online only, but they are under pressure in many states to use the dealership model. If Tesla loses in court, they could end up being less profitable. The main reason Tesla doesn't want dealerships is that they think consumers might not understand (!!) the advantages of electric cars when they see a gas combustion engine in the same dealership. Ie, Tesla thinks people are stupid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_US_dealership_disputes
Personally I think the old historical reasons for restricting theatres and dealerships are obsolete now, primarily because the Internet allows more purchaser options. You can even get movies off the Internet, so consumer choice cannot be threatened. So I don't support how the government STILL restricts auto and movie ticket sales after 72 years. However if Epic wants to argue that the government needs to regulate software sales, I'm willing to listen to their arguments. They just better be cogent.
A creative lawyer might draw some parallels between Kodak and Apple here. Kodak's product: film. Kodak's service: film processing. Apple's product: smart phone. Apple's service: software sales. Kodak used one of its two businesses to try to hamper its competitors in t he other field. Is Apple doing something similar? To be honest, I don't know. I recall Apple saying that they would prohibit some apps for the Apple Watch, like apps that tell the time. Perhaps some creative and lawyer and judge might think that's unfair and might force Apple to allow the sales of certain categories of apps that have been hitherto prohibited. I'm not trying to win any case here for Epic, I'm just trying to anticipate what their arguments might be. A good lawyer (or judge) needs to always consider both sides.