Lobbying group backed by Apple and Google rails against Open App Markets Act

Posted:
in General Discussion edited August 2021
A relatively new lobbying group backed by tech giants including Apple and Google is taking a stand against proposed legislation that targets the outsized market power enjoyed by dominant app stores.

App Store


On Wednesday, U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal, Amy Klobuchar and Marsha Blackburn introduced the Open App Markets Act, a bill that in part calls on tech companies like Apple and Google to be more open to third-party app stores and sideloading.

The legislation further takes issue with mandates that require developers to use first-party payment systems, as Apple does with its App Store, punishment of apps that present different pricing structures on outside platforms and leveraging private data to compete with third-party apps. Preinstalled apps and private APIs are also mentioned in the bill.

In response, a lobbying group called the Chamber of Progress said the proposed legislation "is a finger in the eye of anyone who bought an iPhone or Android because the phones and their app stores are safe, reliable, and easy to use," reports ArsTechnica.

"I don't see any consumers marching in Washington demanding that Congress make their smartphones dumber. And Congress has better things to do than intervene in a multi-million dollar dispute between businesses," said Adam Kovacevich, CEO of the Chamber of Progress.

Kovacevich's statement closely aligns with Apple and Google's stance on the matter.

"Since our founding, we've always put our users at the center of everything we do, and the App Store is the cornerstone of our work to connect developers and customers in a way that is safe and trustworthy," an Apple spokesperson said in a statement to CNBC on Wednesday. "At Apple, our focus is on maintaining an App Store where people can have confidence that every app must meet our rigorous guidelines and their privacy and security is protected."

The Chamber of Progress, which counts Amazon, Facebook and Twitter as funding members, in June lobbied against a package of antitrust bills designed in part to break up Big Tech platforms. That slate of legislation also scrutinizes app store management with one bill focusing on "self-preferencing" and non-discrimination issues.

Along with government pressure, Apple is facing a legal challenge from Epic Games. The developer claims Apple holds a monopoly and is pushing for the adoption of third-party payment systems and app stores on iOS.

Read on AppleInsider
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 46
    If you're in the US, one thing you can do that might help is to contact your senators and ask them to co-sponsor this bill, with any luck they might just listen to their constituents.
     
  • Reply 2 of 46
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,309member
    lmasanti said:
    Disclaimer: I'm born and live in Argentina and I am neither a US citizen not live there.
    (But I use an iPhone.)

    Just a question: Would it be possible that the FCC/lawmakes/etc. made a consult to users —like the one on broadband—.
    1— The telcos will send you a message to go to some site with your browser.
    2— When you enter there, your phone number will be used ONLY to avoid that you vote more than once.
    3— Depending in your operating system you'll be asked if you want to have —by example— ‘alternative app stores in iOS,’ and so on.
    4— Other questions could be about companies tracking your behaviour.

    Maybe it could be done more or less compulsory.

    Lawmakers say the want to ‘protect customers.’ Why don't ask customers themselves?

    (Well, maybe lawmakers lost votes.)
    Great idea. It would be nice if our Congress actually asked users what they want instead of simply telling us what we can have. I don’t remember the FCC asking any normal citizen about broadband. Problem here, and probably in Argentina, is that internet companies pay politicians to do what they want, which isn’t always what customers want. 

    I live in a smaller town where the City Council actually talked to us asking if we wanted a city operated fiber internet. Enough people said yes so they asked if they should use an established ISP or not have one. We spoke, they listened and we have a connection to the internet without paying extra for an ISP (Comcast, etc). This can work for app stores but only if none of the people in power are being paid off by competing businesses  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 46
    Apple (and Google) are way too strong for anyone’s liking, incl the App Store. I remember the old days where Steve was on every platform to complain about, mostly, Microsoft. These days it’s Tim’s shop that stops every competition and we the consumers are paying for it (sometimes with our lives). Of course there need to more places to get Apps, or like in the old days, download directly from a website. The argument that Apple keeps us safe is since two weeks out of the window anyway because Journo’s and political activists were killed because Apple was sleeping at the wheel. 
    elijahgdarkvaderArianneFeldry
  • Reply 4 of 46
    dee_deedee_dee Posts: 129member
    I’m a pretty big Apple fan, but when someone pays $1000 + for a phone, they deserve the right to do what they want with it.  I will still use the App Store, and I’m sure lots still will.  But if someone wants to side load god knows what and is fine with the risk then go right ahead. 
    elijahgCheeseFreezedarkvadershareef777K!llSwitch
  • Reply 5 of 46
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,136member
    JohnDinEU said:
    Apple (and Google) are way too strong for anyone’s liking, incl the App Store. I remember the old days where Steve was on every platform to complain about, mostly, Microsoft. These days it’s Tim’s shop that stops every competition and we the consumers are paying for it (sometimes with our lives). Of course there need to more places to get Apps, or like in the old days, download directly from a website. The argument that Apple keeps us safe is since two weeks out of the window anyway because Journo’s and political activists were killed because Apple was sleeping at the wheel. 
    First post and all you do is spew nonsense.  Go troll elsewhere, or at least try doing a better job than doing some kind of revisionist history.

    dee_dee said:
    I’m a pretty big Apple fan, but when someone pays $1000 + for a phone, they deserve the right to do what they want with it.  I will still use the App Store, and I’m sure lots still will.  But if someone wants to side load god knows what and is fine with the risk then go right ahead. 
    You already can.  It's called "Jailbreaking".  Apple has no obligation to make it easy to do it.  If you side-load a Trojan-infected application and it bricks your iPhone, I guarantee the first thing you're going to do is play stupid and walk to an Apple store and pretend that it "just stopped working".  I lost count of how many news articles came out back in the day about some severe iPhone malware and criticizing Apple's "security", only to read in the fine print that it was a jailbroken iPhone.

    Even Cydia is barely the hanging on since there is little people realized there is little to no need to jailbreak anymore.   
    ArchStantondope_ahminebaconstangpujones1p-dogGeorgeBMackillroyigorskyn2itivguyroundaboutnow
  • Reply 6 of 46
    JohnDinEU said:
    Apple (and Google) are way too strong for anyone’s liking, incl the App Store. I remember the old days where Steve was on every platform to complain about, mostly, Microsoft. These days it’s Tim’s shop that stops every competition and we the consumers are paying for it (sometimes with our lives). Of course there need to more places to get Apps, or like in the old days, download directly from a website. The argument that Apple keeps us safe is since two weeks out of the window anyway because Journo’s and political activists were killed because Apple was sleeping at the wheel. 
    Total posts 1 for “JohnDinEU”. Nothing but a Troll. If any problem needs addressing its trolls who have a single mission to disinform (a.k.a. Harm) those using what would otherwise be (and should be) the greatest tool for information, the internet. 
    Apple “stops every competition”. Almost all Apple products are hugely copied and marketed on the planet. Nothing wrong with that, imitation is the finest form of flattery. But it completely squashes this Trolls lie. Chances are good he is from a troll farm whose reason for spreading this lie is to help a product that is in competition with Apple. 
    baconstangp-dogkillroyigorskyroundaboutnowCuJoYYCwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 7 of 46
    dee_dee said:
    I’m a pretty big Apple fan, but when someone pays $1000 + for a phone, they deserve the right to do what they want with it.  I will still use the App Store, and I’m sure lots still will.  But if someone wants to side load god knows what and is fine with the risk then go right ahead. 
    Big fan? Huh, my memory must be bad on that. Thought I’d Been reading recent posts from you on your dislike of Apple policy, dislike Apple’s file pro, etc. Maybe I’m thinking of someone else. 

    Regardless, devices and software are routinely built with safety mechanisms. Circumvent them and you void certain EULAs etc. As the other poster said, those people are frequently the first to cry for warranty protection.
    But even more so, Apple is very very upfront that they intend to take as much risk out of the user usage process as possible. As simple, safe, and reliable as possible. What a concept right? They’ve done that. Obviously many many of us like and appreciate that. That’s what Apple sells and does so very upfront about it. Numerous times they’ve even blocked what others allow across a number of differing things, even passing up greater short term sales, in order to stick to keeping it as simple reliable and secure for users. Even better, For users who don’t like that, they have the numerous alternative just one display case over. It’s much more free to do what you want. Yet oddly some people, even a rare big fan of Apple, insists Apple has to get back the engineering table, design it to better open up, and get that Apple to stop selling it the way they think is best to sell it. 
    baconstangpujones1p-dogkillroyroundaboutnowCuJoYYCwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 8 of 46
    Trolling is attacking a poster rather than presenting intelligent arguments and discussing.
    Regardless of ideas, the lack of them is the only common point in most posts regarding this matter. There may be people who find this so important they signed up to comment - you are very welcome. This was all very obvious for a very long time now, especially since the Epic attack on Apple. Iv been a dedicated Apple Insider for twenty years now and commenting for a decade, so for some of us this has been widely debated. But again it seems crucial for non-trolls to realize the sheer size and scope of this matter.

    1 - Anti-Trust laws are there for a reason, and we wouldnt have Apple now if they hadnt been upheld before.
    People attacking the regulator approach will always have the option to keep exactly the same phone usage, only further options will be available to the rest.

    2 - Security downgrade claims are blatantly fallacious, when what is being advocated by common sense here is simply allowing the same App Store sandboxing magic to other app stores.
    If Apple simply curates third-party app stores like it does its apps, its phenomenal security will be remain just the same for the former.
  • Reply 9 of 46
    j2fusionj2fusion Posts: 153member
    Trolling is attacking a poster rather than presenting intelligent arguments and discussing.
    Regardless of ideas, the lack of them is the only common point in most posts regarding this matter. There may be people who find this so important they signed up to comment - you are very welcome. This was all very obvious for a very long time now, especially since the Epic attack on Apple. Iv been a dedicated Apple Insider for twenty years now and commenting for a decade, so for some of us this has been widely debated. But again it seems crucial for non-trolls to realize the sheer size and scope of this matter.

    1 - Anti-Trust laws are there for a reason, and we wouldnt have Apple now if they hadnt been upheld before.
    People attacking the regulator approach will always have the option to keep exactly the same phone usage, only further options will be available to the rest.

    2 - Security downgrade claims are blatantly fallacious, when what is being advocated by common sense here is simply allowing the same App Store sandboxing magic to other app stores.
    If Apple simply curates third-party app stores like it does its apps, its phenomenal security will be remain just the same for the former.
    Ok, let’s say for sake of argument Apple can maintain security while opening up to other App stores.  How do you feel about Apples recent ATT change?  What do you think would have happened if there were multiple App stores? Well, I believe companies like Facebook would have flocked to another App Store that didn’t have such a requirement and FB and other companies would continue to track us without our permission.  In fact, a large company like FB would have the resources to set up their own store that meet their business interest.  This is just one example and how does that help the consumer?
    p-dogrob53killroyn2itivguyArchStantonCuJoYYCwatto_cobrajony0Detnator
  • Reply 10 of 46
    If you're in the US, one thing you can do that might help is to contact your senators and ask them to co-sponsor this bill, with any luck they might just listen to their constituents.
     
    Why on Earth would you sponsor something that goes against a free market?

    This is big tech lobbying; they know the tide is turning. I wholeheartedly support side-loading of apps and App Stores on Android and iPhone with the full responsibility and consent of the end-user. If they want to, they can stick with Apple; if they want more freedom, they use an alternative. Nobody loses.
  • Reply 11 of 46
    sflocal said:
    JohnDinEU said:
    Apple (and Google) are way too strong for anyone’s liking, incl the App Store. I remember the old days where Steve was on every platform to complain about, mostly, Microsoft. These days it’s Tim’s shop that stops every competition and we the consumers are paying for it (sometimes with our lives). Of course there need to more places to get Apps, or like in the old days, download directly from a website. The argument that Apple keeps us safe is since two weeks out of the window anyway because Journo’s and political activists were killed because Apple was sleeping at the wheel. 
    First post and all you do is spew nonsense.  Go troll elsewhere, or at least try doing a better job than doing some kind of revisionist history.

    dee_dee said:
    I’m a pretty big Apple fan, but when someone pays $1000 + for a phone, they deserve the right to do what they want with it.  I will still use the App Store, and I’m sure lots still will.  But if someone wants to side load god knows what and is fine with the risk then go right ahead. 
    You already can.  It's called "Jailbreaking".  Apple has no obligation to make it easy to do it.  If you side-load a Trojan-infected application and it bricks your iPhone, I guarantee the first thing you're going to do is play stupid and walk to an Apple store and pretend that it "just stopped working".  I lost count of how many news articles came out back in the day about some severe iPhone malware and criticizing Apple's "security", only to read in the fine print that it was a jailbroken iPhone.

    Even Cydia is barely the hanging on since there is little people realized there is little to no need to jailbreak anymore.   
    Jailbreaking is not side-loading.
    Far from it. And you know it. 

    If you have to work your way through barriers, work against Apple, to install a custom version of iOS and the firmware, you are not an average consumer; you are part of the very few that date to take this on.

    Side-loading, as proposed, is making this ability part of iOS, without artificial barriers. It should be frictionless. 

    Also, the first person you responded to isn’t “spewing nonsense”. He is expressing his opinion. If you can’t handle opinions, you are the nonsensical one.
    edited August 2021 darkvader
  • Reply 12 of 46
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    rob53 said:
    lmasanti said:
    Disclaimer: I'm born and live in Argentina and I am neither a US citizen not live there.
    (But I use an iPhone.)

    Just a question: Would it be possible that the FCC/lawmakes/etc. made a consult to users —like the one on broadband—.
    1— The telcos will send you a message to go to some site with your browser.
    2— When you enter there, your phone number will be used ONLY to avoid that you vote more than once.
    3— Depending in your operating system you'll be asked if you want to have —by example— ‘alternative app stores in iOS,’ and so on.
    4— Other questions could be about companies tracking your behaviour.

    Maybe it could be done more or less compulsory.

    Lawmakers say the want to ‘protect customers.’ Why don't ask customers themselves?

    (Well, maybe lawmakers lost votes.)
    Great idea. It would be nice if our Congress actually asked users what they want instead of simply telling us what we can have. I don’t remember the FCC asking any normal citizen about broadband. Problem here, and probably in Argentina, is that internet companies pay politicians to do what they want, which isn’t always what customers want. 

    I live in a smaller town where the City Council actually talked to us asking if we wanted a city operated fiber internet. Enough people said yes so they asked if they should use an established ISP or not have one. We spoke, they listened and we have a connection to the internet without paying extra for an ISP (Comcast, etc). This can work for app stores but only if none of the people in power are being paid off by competing businesses  

    An advantage of both representative democracy as well as bureaucracy is that they can closely examine and debate all aspects of an issue and, presumably, come up with the best solution.

    We've seen the destruction agendas fueled by propaganda & populism can cause.
    killroy
  • Reply 13 of 46
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    j2fusion said:
    Trolling is attacking a poster rather than presenting intelligent arguments and discussing.
    Regardless of ideas, the lack of them is the only common point in most posts regarding this matter. There may be people who find this so important they signed up to comment - you are very welcome. This was all very obvious for a very long time now, especially since the Epic attack on Apple. Iv been a dedicated Apple Insider for twenty years now and commenting for a decade, so for some of us this has been widely debated. But again it seems crucial for non-trolls to realize the sheer size and scope of this matter.

    1 - Anti-Trust laws are there for a reason, and we wouldnt have Apple now if they hadnt been upheld before.
    People attacking the regulator approach will always have the option to keep exactly the same phone usage, only further options will be available to the rest.

    2 - Security downgrade claims are blatantly fallacious, when what is being advocated by common sense here is simply allowing the same App Store sandboxing magic to other app stores.
    If Apple simply curates third-party app stores like it does its apps, its phenomenal security will be remain just the same for the former.
    Ok, let’s say for sake of argument Apple can maintain security while opening up to other App stores.  How do you feel about Apples recent ATT change?  What do you think would have happened if there were multiple App stores? Well, I believe companies like Facebook would have flocked to another App Store that didn’t have such a requirement and FB and other companies would continue to track us without our permission.  In fact, a large company like FB would have the resources to set up their own store that meet their business interest.  This is just one example and how does that help the consumer?
    Yep!  But there's more:
    So, Russia creates an app store to run on American phones.   How is Apple to police that?  
    "Dear Mr Putin, please remove that app spreading disinformation on COVID vaccines because we don't think it's very nice to kill Americans.   And, while you're at it, please also remove that app that's been spying on American politicians you have not approved."
    edited August 2021 rob53watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 14 of 46
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    If you're in the US, one thing you can do that might help is to contact your senators and ask them to co-sponsor this bill, with any luck they might just listen to their constituents.
     
    Why on Earth would you sponsor something that goes against a free market?

    This is big tech lobbying; they know the tide is turning. I wholeheartedly support side-loading of apps and App Stores on Android and iPhone with the full responsibility and consent of the end-user. If they want to, they can stick with Apple; if they want more freedom, they use an alternative. Nobody loses.

    "Free Market" is not the same as unconstrained, unregulated market where anything goes.
    We settled that question over a hundred years ago.
    roundaboutnowwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 15 of 46
    Apple and Google didn't thwart competition in mobile, they just created the best software, and consumers voted with their wallets. Microsoft, Palm, Blackberry, and Danger all tried and they all eventually failed. That's how a free market is supposed to function.

    If you don't like Apple's walled garden, if you want more control over which applications you can run on your smartphone, then use Android. There is consumer choice here...and neither company seems to be able to gain total dominance: iOS has a greater market share in the U.S., but Android has a greater market share worldwide. Again, this is how properly functioning competition is supposed to work.

    If Congress forces Apple to allow other app stores, who is going to bear the cost of fixing the additional security issues? Is Congress going to pay for it with our taxes? Is Apple supposed to pay for it? Are the developers supposed to bear the cost? Who does the consumer turn to when these security problems need to be fixed? The developer will blame Apple, Apple will blame the developer, and the consumer will be stuck in the middle with a less secure, very expensive smartphone.

    I didn't sign up for that. I use iOS because I WANT my smartphone to work differently than my Mac. I want it to be more secure, even if that means that I have to give up some freedoms. I need my iPhone to work every time I use it. I prefer Apple's approach, but I know people who want more control and more freedom who prefer Android.

    Congress should stop wasting time interfering in a functioning market and fix actual problems like climate change, COVID, and the outrageous costs of healthcare and education in the United States.
    rob53killroyigorskyn2itivguyroundaboutnowmark fearingrob55GeorgeBMacArchStantonricmac
  • Reply 16 of 46
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,309member
    macsimcon said:
    Apple and Google didn't thwart competition in mobile, they just created the best software, and consumers voted with their wallets. Microsoft, Palm, Blackberry, and Danger all tried and they all eventually failed. That's how a free market is supposed to function.

    If you don't like Apple's walled garden, if you want more control over which applications you can run on your smartphone, then use Android. There is consumer choice here...and neither company seems to be able to gain total dominance: iOS has a greater market share in the U.S., but Android has a greater market share worldwide. Again, this is how properly functioning competition is supposed to work.

    If Congress forces Apple to allow other app stores, who is going to bear the cost of fixing the additional security issues? Is Congress going to pay for it with our taxes? Is Apple supposed to pay for it? Are the developers supposed to bear the cost? Who does the consumer turn to when these security problems need to be fixed? The developer will blame Apple, Apple will blame the developer, and the consumer will be stuck in the middle with a less secure, very expensive smartphone.

    I didn't sign up for that. I use iOS because I WANT my smartphone to work differently than my Mac. I want it to be more secure, even if that means that I have to give up some freedoms. I need my iPhone to work every time I use it. I prefer Apple's approach, but I know people who want more control and more freedom who prefer Android.

    Congress should stop wasting time interfering in a functioning market and fix actual problems like climate change, COVID, and the outrageous costs of healthcare and education in the United States.
    We’ll said. My views as well. 
    n2itivguywatto_cobrajony0Detnator
  • Reply 17 of 46
    j2fusion said:
    Trolling is attacking a poster rather than presenting intelligent arguments and discussing.
    Regardless of ideas, the lack of them is the only common point in most posts regarding this matter. There may be people who find this so important they signed up to comment - you are very welcome. This was all very obvious for a very long time now, especially since the Epic attack on Apple. Iv been a dedicated Apple Insider for twenty years now and commenting for a decade, so for some of us this has been widely debated. But again it seems crucial for non-trolls to realize the sheer size and scope of this matter.

    1 - Anti-Trust laws are there for a reason, and we wouldnt have Apple now if they hadnt been upheld before.
    People attacking the regulator approach will always have the option to keep exactly the same phone usage, only further options will be available to the rest.

    2 - Security downgrade claims are blatantly fallacious, when what is being advocated by common sense here is simply allowing the same App Store sandboxing magic to other app stores.
    If Apple simply curates third-party app stores like it does its apps, its phenomenal security will be remain just the same for the former.
    Ok, let’s say for sake of argument Apple can maintain security while opening up to other App stores.  How do you feel about Apples recent ATT change?  What do you think would have happened if there were multiple App stores? Well, I believe companies like Facebook would have flocked to another App Store that didn’t have such a requirement and FB and other companies would continue to track us without our permission.  In fact, a large company like FB would have the resources to set up their own store that meet their business interest.  This is just one example and how does that help the consumer?
    Hey, those are great questions. I believe they ultimately all lead to whether or not i should have the power to decide on you life. me or anyone, any institution.

    But in case of app stores like your facebook example, that would be up to the user. Still Apple could use Googles three strike system, or any other that works. Apple sanctions an 3rd-party app store, keeps it sandboxed perhaps totally in the beginning, maybe more relaxedly so like Apple usually does. But in essence it will address such complaints as you point out and at the third one there would be no more said 3rd-party app store. The actual App Store now is so bloated in functioning that Apple could benefit from this by allocating their experts to evaluating a few app stores at their quality level, rather than millions of apps at a dismal quality (everyone complains).  But the most important question in this matter for me is that the App Store will most likely be separated from Apple, observing past anti-trust jurisprudence, so it is not so much a question of whether or not we should have 3rd-party app stores, but rather how Apple can keep the quality up. Because if we keep resisting 3rd-party then we will definitely see our beloved quality of use deteriorate thats for sure, again from past cases.

    Your last question is the perspective one and most interesting for me. I personally think you may be right. so i doubt that i will ever install a 3rd-party app store. Even if i reminisce often, my jailbreaking, gaming days are long gone. i jailbroke the first iphone (took 24 hours then) to use it where i lived, and i last gamed 20 years ago. Im perfecty happy with how things are, and will not change my phone. But, like Voltaire i think, i will defend to the death the right for people to use their phone as they wish. Besides and as shared, if Apple doesnt prepare now we all better get ready for a severe decrease in quality once the regulator institutes their measures, as there arent so many possible. And upholding constitutional and fundamental legislature is the reason why we have had an interesting run in freedom in this past century. Nothing is perfect, but anything lesse than the freedom we acquired as people. thank you for opening this!
  • Reply 18 of 46
    darkvaderdarkvader Posts: 1,146member
    Marsha Blackburn?  She's generally a complete piece of garbage.  And she's sponsoring a great piece of legislation like this?  Wow.  Mind blown.
  • Reply 19 of 46
    igorskyigorsky Posts: 774member
    dee_dee said:
    I’m a pretty big Apple fan, but when someone pays $1000 + for a phone, they deserve the right to do what they want with it.  I will still use the App Store, and I’m sure lots still will.  But if someone wants to side load god knows what and is fine with the risk then go right ahead. 
    Based on anecdotal evidence, mostly made up of what I've seen from iPhone users online, there is no doubt that many of these side loaders, who would've claimed to understand the risks, will turn around and blame Apple and expect them to fix their fuck ups from side loading apps that will have in some way damaged their phone or their phone experience.  And then the icing on the cake will be when they blame Apple for allowing side loading.

    I would put money on this if Vegas created a line.
    ArchStantonmcdavewatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 20 of 46
    igorskyigorsky Posts: 774member
    macsimcon said:
    Apple and Google didn't thwart competition in mobile, they just created the best software, and consumers voted with their wallets. Microsoft, Palm, Blackberry, and Danger all tried and they all eventually failed. That's how a free market is supposed to function.
    It's amazing to me that through all these hearings and all the whining by Tim Sweeney, nobody has every asked what consumers want.  And like you said, consumers have clearly voted with their wallets.
    GeorgeBMacn2itivguyj2fusionArchStantonwatto_cobrajony0
Sign In or Register to comment.