France fines Apple over App Tracking Transparency, but doesn't order changes

AppleInsider

Apple can continue to use its iOS App Tracking Transparency privacy tool in France, but must still pay a fine for having used it before.

An example of an App Tracking Transparency prompt

France's Authorite de la Concurrence, its competition authority, first announced an antitrust investigation into Apple and its App Tracking Transparency (ATT) in July 2023.

Now according to Reuters, it has released its conclusion and also fined Apple -- but for less than it had previously been expected to.

As with recent reports of the European Union reducing its fines to appease the US and avoid retaliatory tariffs, France has elected to fine Apple $162.4 million, where its regulations allow for up to 10% of a company's annual global revenue.

More significantly, France has not required Apple to change anything about its ATT tool. Nonetheless, it is fining Apple for having used ATT between 2021 and 2023.

"While the objective pursued by ATT is not in itself open to criticism," said the regulator in a statement, "the way it is implemented is neither necessary nor proportionate to Apple's stated objective of protecting personal data."

The regulator added that Apple's ATT "particularly penalized smaller publishers," arguing that the ability to use tracking data was more crucial for these publishers than larger ones.

One 2020 complaint said that Apple failed to stick to EU privacy rules, since while apps and other advertising platforms were limited by the feature, Apple itself wasn't held to the same privacy standard. While apps could be blocked from tracking via ATT, Apple's own apps weren't controlled in the same manner, meaning they were effectively unrestricted from tracking the user.

In 2021, the French Competition Authority said it couldn't find fault in App Tracking Transparency ahead of its launch. At the time, authority chief Isabelle de Silva said that it couldn't intervene "just because there might be a negative impact for companies in the ecosystem," and that they hadn't found "flagrant examples of discrimination."

Apple has reportedly responded that it is disappointed with the French regulator's decision. But notes that the country is allowing ATT to continue exactly as it is.

France has, though, ordered Apple to publish the decision about the fine on its website for seven days, although at time of writing there doesn't appear to be such a notice on Apple's French site.

Separately, Germany has been investigating Apple's use of ATT. In mid-March 2025, Apple lost an appeal against German's Federal Court of Justice, and is now awaiting a decision on a fine from the country.

Previously the French Competition Authority set a record-breaking fine of 1.1 billion euros ($1.2 billion) against Apple in 2020 over pricing practices that amounted to an antitrust violation. In 2022, an appeals court reduced the fine to $366 million.



Read on AppleInsider

anonymouse

Blatant shakedown.

beowulfschmidt

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

avon b7

beowulfschmidt said:

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

The Reuters article is a little clearer on that point. 

"Coeuré told reporters the regulator had not spelled out how Apple should change its app, but that it was up to the company to make sure it now complied with the ruling.

The compliance process could take some time, he added, because Apple was waiting for rulings on regulators in Germany, Italy, Poland and Romania who are also investigating the ATT tool."

https://www.reuters.com/technology/french-antitrust-regulator-fines-apple-150-million-euros-over-privacy-tool-2025-03-31/

On the size of the fine, that was also tackled head on (it was proportional):

"We apply competition law in an apolitical manner," Benoit Coeure told a press conference."

While maximum fines can be up to 10% of global revenue (and it's global as a dissuasory measure), the fines still have to be proportional and take into account other factors such as reincidence. 

anonymouse

avon b7 said:

beowulfschmidt said:

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

The Reuters article is a little clearer on that point. 

"Coeuré told reporters the regulator had not spelled out how Apple should change its app, but that it was up to the company to make sure it now complied with the ruling.

The compliance process could take some time, he added, because Apple was waiting for rulings on regulators in Germany, Italy, Poland and Romania who are also investigating the ATT tool."

https://www.reuters.com/technology/french-antitrust-regulator-fines-apple-150-million-euros-over-privacy-tool-2025-03-31/

On the size of the fine, that was also tackled head on (it was proportional):

"We apply competition law in an apolitical manner," Benoit Coeure told a press conference."

While maximum fines can be up to 10% of global revenue (and it's global as a dissuasory measure), the fines still have to be proportional and take into account other factors such as reincidence. 

Like everything else the EU and Eropean countries do, this is like a bad joke. "We didn't say what you needed to do, but, because you didn't do what we wanted, we're fining you."

That's like deciding you want a low speed limit, not setting or posting it, then fining "speeders" for being over the limit by whatever amount you want them to be. Europe and the EU no longer operate under the rule of law, they operate under the whims of the "regulators".

avon b7

anonymouse said:

avon b7 said:

beowulfschmidt said:

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

The Reuters article is a little clearer on that point. 

"Coeuré told reporters the regulator had not spelled out how Apple should change its app, but that it was up to the company to make sure it now complied with the ruling.

The compliance process could take some time, he added, because Apple was waiting for rulings on regulators in Germany, Italy, Poland and Romania who are also investigating the ATT tool."

https://www.reuters.com/technology/french-antitrust-regulator-fines-apple-150-million-euros-over-privacy-tool-2025-03-31/

On the size of the fine, that was also tackled head on (it was proportional):

"We apply competition law in an apolitical manner," Benoit Coeure told a press conference."

While maximum fines can be up to 10% of global revenue (and it's global as a dissuasory measure), the fines still have to be proportional and take into account other factors such as reincidence. 

Like everything else the EU and Eropean countries do, this is like a bad joke. "We didn't say what you needed to do, but, because you didn't do what we wanted, we're fining you."

That's like deciding you want a low speed limit, not setting or posting it, then fining "speeders" for being over the limit by whatever amount you want them to be. Europe and the EU no longer operate under the rule of law, they operate under the whims of the "regulators".

Each EU member state has to transpose EU law into its own national laws. As a result, there can be different requirements across different member states but all of them comply with EU legislation. 

This case is France specific but Apple knows it could fall foul to other member state requirements. It could come up with a compliance effort that satisfies everyone. 

That means waiting for other rulings to be made and that is exactly what my quoted text says.

It's not a joke. 

The French ruling makes it clear that Apple exempted itself from the application of ATT for its own apps. 

ATT itself was not a problem. Apple's implementation was (in the view of the regulator). 

entropys

 No it isn’t a joke, and eventually the EU will break apart because the bureaucrats’ actions in Brussels will exceed what the voters in member states will tolerate.
Brexit is just the first.  

anonymouse

avon b7 said:

anonymouse said:

avon b7 said:

beowulfschmidt said:

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

The Reuters article is a little clearer on that point. 

"Coeuré told reporters the regulator had not spelled out how Apple should change its app, but that it was up to the company to make sure it now complied with the ruling.

The compliance process could take some time, he added, because Apple was waiting for rulings on regulators in Germany, Italy, Poland and Romania who are also investigating the ATT tool."

https://www.reuters.com/technology/french-antitrust-regulator-fines-apple-150-million-euros-over-privacy-tool-2025-03-31/

On the size of the fine, that was also tackled head on (it was proportional):

"We apply competition law in an apolitical manner," Benoit Coeure told a press conference."

While maximum fines can be up to 10% of global revenue (and it's global as a dissuasory measure), the fines still have to be proportional and take into account other factors such as reincidence. 

Like everything else the EU and Eropean countries do, this is like a bad joke. "We didn't say what you needed to do, but, because you didn't do what we wanted, we're fining you."

That's like deciding you want a low speed limit, not setting or posting it, then fining "speeders" for being over the limit by whatever amount you want them to be. Europe and the EU no longer operate under the rule of law, they operate under the whims of the "regulators".

Each EU member state has to transpose EU law into its own national laws. As a result, there can be different requirements across different member states but all of them comply with EU legislation. 

This case is France specific but Apple knows it could fall foul to other member state requirements. It could come up with a compliance effort that satisfies everyone. 

That means waiting for other rulings to be made and that is exactly what my quoted text says.

It's not a joke. 

The French ruling makes it clear that Apple exempted itself from the application of ATT for its own apps. 

ATT itself was not a problem. Apple's implementation was (in the view of the regulator). 

Funny stuff, trying to justify mafia style tactics in the EU.

edited March 31

cropr

anonymouse said:

Like everything else the EU and Eropean countries do, this is like a bad joke. "We didn't say what you needed to do, but, because you didn't do what we wanted, we're fining you."

That's like deciding you want a low speed limit, not setting or posting it, then fining "speeders" for being over the limit by whatever amount you want them to be. Europe and the EU no longer operate under the rule of law, they operate under the whims of the "regulators".

There is a fundamental difference between the way American laws and European laws are applied.   American laws are applied very strictly.  You must do exactly X to comply to the law.  In Europe the spirit of the law is as important as the letter of the law, and it is up to the people to apply the law in good faith according to common sense.   Disclaimers for  products sold in the US are on average 5 times longer than their European counterparts.

I understand that a lot of Americans have cultural issues accepting the way European law is working.  In this case, the court stated that Apple did not fulfill the requirements and that is for Europeans more than sufficient to understand what is meant: Apple should apply ATT for its own apps as well, but it is up to Apple to decide which changes should be made to comply to the rule.

You last sentence is clearly an indication that you fail to understand that any non US law system can have its own merits

davidw

beowulfschmidt said:

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

But Apple do follow the same ATT rules. The ATT do not restrict app developers from tracking their customers while using any of the developers apps. The ATT only restrict app developers from tracking their customers while using a third party app, unless given permission to under ATT. If  a developer do not track their app customers across third party apps, there is no need for their apps to have an ATT option. This is the way it's suppose to work.

Apple do not track their app users across third party apps. (At least not for the purpose of data mining for targeted ads.)  In other words, Apple Music customers are not tracked when they open a browser or use Google Maps or check the news using a Wall Street app or while checking their GMail, while still listening to Apple Music. But Facebook will track their customers when they get on the internet or use other third party apps, access location data, etc., if they still have their Facebook app (or any app Facebook owns.) open. Facebook is always allowed to track their customer while using any Facebook apps. Being tracked while using a third party app is what ATT alerts the users to and they are given the option to deny Facebook from doing this. If Apple were to track their app users across third party apps, I'm sure they too would allow their users to prevent this with an ATT option.

BTW- This is why Facebook is so Hell bent about forcing Apple to allow other browser engines on iOS. Facebook want to have a browser inside their own Facebook app. Thus not having to inform their users under ATT, that they are being tracked while browsing the internet with a browser that opens up inside their Facebook app.

edited April 1

ihatescreennames

It’s all very strange considering ATT is a feature that allows users to protect their privacy, which can be turned off BTW, and the EU is siding against that (the fine) but also saying Apple needs not make any changes. It seems the EU is on the side of invasive tracking by third parties, which runs counter to their claims of user privacy. 

avon b7

ihatescreennames said:

It’s all very strange considering ATT is a feature that allows users to protect their privacy, which can be turned off BTW, and the EU is siding against that (the fine) but also saying Apple needs not make any changes. It seems the EU is on the side of invasive tracking by third parties, which runs counter to their claims of user privacy. 

This isn't about the EU but France and, as stated in the article, it isn't about siding with anything against ATT but the implementation of ATT. 

ihatescreennames

avon b7 said:

ihatescreennames said:

It’s all very strange considering ATT is a feature that allows users to protect their privacy, which can be turned off BTW, and the EU is siding against that (the fine) but also saying Apple needs not make any changes. It seems the EU is on the side of invasive tracking by third parties, which runs counter to their claims of user privacy. 

This isn't about the EU but France and, as stated in the article, it isn't about siding with anything against ATT but the implementation of ATT. 

Yes, France, my mistake. 

Still, reading at other sites, the issues seems to be that France disagrees that ATT should (in plain language) ask a user if the user wants to give an app permission to track them since the app should be asking themselves. 

As others have pointed out, the existing law didn’t raise much concern but ATT made big waves, see Facebook losing money after ATT and being upset but not making a peep before that when apps were supposed to be giving that choice to users on their own. 

From that stance it seems the existing privacy laws were fairly toothless since no companies had been complaining much with them, but when Apple implemented a system that actually worked those companies quickly became vocal about how unfair user privacy is. 

beowulfschmidt

avon b7 said:

beowulfschmidt said:

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

The Reuters article is a little clearer on that point. 

"Coeuré told reporters the regulator had not spelled out how Apple should change its app, but that it was up to the company to make sure it now complied with the ruling.

The compliance process could take some time, he added, because Apple was waiting for rulings on regulators in Germany, Italy, Poland and Romania who are also investigating the ATT tool."

https://www.reuters.com/technology/french-antitrust-regulator-fines-apple-150-million-euros-over-privacy-tool-2025-03-31/

On the size of the fine, that was also tackled head on (it was proportional):

"We apply competition law in an apolitical manner," Benoit Coeure told a press conference."

While maximum fines can be up to 10% of global revenue (and it's global as a dissuasory measure), the fines still have to be proportional and take into account other factors such as reincidence. 

"We're not going to tell you how to fix your app to avoid this fine, but you'd better change it, or we're going to keep fining you."

"Bring me a rock.  No, not that one."

davidw

beowulfschmidt said:

avon b7 said:

beowulfschmidt said:

If they had said, "ATT is fine, but Apple has to follow the same rules, so since you didn't, we're fining you," that would have been pretty legit.

Instead they said, "ATT is fine, nothing wrong with it.  But we're going to fine you anyway.  Because we can, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it."

The Reuters article is a little clearer on that point. 

"Coeuré told reporters the regulator had not spelled out how Apple should change its app, but that it was up to the company to make sure it now complied with the ruling.

The compliance process could take some time, he added, because Apple was waiting for rulings on regulators in Germany, Italy, Poland and Romania who are also investigating the ATT tool."

https://www.reuters.com/technology/french-antitrust-regulator-fines-apple-150-million-euros-over-privacy-tool-2025-03-31/

On the size of the fine, that was also tackled head on (it was proportional):

"We apply competition law in an apolitical manner," Benoit Coeure told a press conference."

While maximum fines can be up to 10% of global revenue (and it's global as a dissuasory measure), the fines still have to be proportional and take into account other factors such as reincidence. 

"We're not going to tell you how to fix your app to avoid this fine, but you'd better change it, or we're going to keep fining you."

"Bring me a rock.  No, not that one."

That's like if you were driving along, get pulled over by the police and handed a fix-it ticket, but the police don't tell you what needs fixing. And if you don't bring proof that you fixed  the problem (to traffic court) by the time stated on the ticket, you will get another ticket that can amount to 10% of your income, for not fixing it.