Japan law is forcing more browser choice on iPhone in December
Beyond just requiring Apple to allow third-party app stores, Japan's new anti-trust regulations will also force Apple to allow third-party browsers on iPhone starting in December.
Japan's Federal Trade Commission | Image Credit: Horocassi234 on Wikimedia Commons
Japan's Fair Trade Commission is gearing up to enforce its new Smartphone Act rules that directly impact Apple's software policies. Central to the changes is Apple's WebKit-only rule for all iOS browsers.
The new guidelines, translated by Open Web Advocacy, give Apple until December 2025 to remove restrictions that block or hinder third-party browser engines on iOS. That deadline means iPhone users in Japan could see actual alternatives to Safari as early as 2026.
In July, Japan's Fair Trade Commission finalized updates to the Mobile Software Competition Act, with full enforcement set for December 18, 2025. The rules require Apple to allow third-party app stores, alternative payments, and broader access to hardware features like Face ID and Touch ID.
In the EU, similar rules have allowed third-party engines in theory, but implementation has been slow due to added requirements. Japan's approach aims to simplify and make adoption more practical for developers.
In May, Japan's Fair Trade Commission sought public feedback on proposed regulations targeting major tech firms like Apple and Google. By July 29 -- just weeks after the consultation period ended -- the agency announced it had updated the guidelines under the Mobile Software Competition Act.
Apple argues the changes could undermine user privacy and security. It also objects to giving rivals these technologies without payment, saying it would unfairly benefit competing services.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
- Adobe doesn't pay Apple for letting Photoshop on macOS save files or print or anything else.
- Delta doesn't pay Apple for API access on iOS.
- And Appleinsider doesn't pay for this site to use WebKit.
I'm OK with Apple charging for services (iCloud and more) and for upgrades to the OS. And for Apple to charge for selling and distributing software. But for API access? Like 1 cent for each time I open an app? No way!When I wrote old school, I meant really old school, back in the days when the cost of Visual Studio was beyond most independent developers as was just the documentation of the Mac interface. Am I the only one that remembers the "Macintosh Programmers Workshop", "Inside Macintosh" or the "Macintosh Toolbox Documentation"?
Back in those days one did have to pay a license fee to companies like Microsoft and others just to use the interfaces.
I remember those days and I fear that the way things are going, those days are coming back.
For some reason many people seem to think that Apple, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, and the rest of the companies that make the core features of the things we use today have no right to recover the costs of developing and maintaining those tools and services. Or they think that somehow, they know what those tools and services should actually cost and want to limit how much the companies charge for them to the imaginary values they made up
Are companies in it to make as much money as they can? Probably. Is there a problem with their approach to maximizing their profits? I think so. Are things going to get better with courts and governments trying to decide how they run their businesses? Really? Does anyone think that?
Maybe I'm just old and am too bothered by those young kids on my lawn.
(Yes, I know Microsoft didn't write the Apple documentation or develop the Apple OS. But it did appear to me , back in those caveman days, that even then Apple tried to be a less expensive platform to develop on. But even with that it still wasn't cheap for an individual developer. I still have my original Apple II+, my first Mac SE, and even my early MPW and CodeWarrior Gold discs.)
Apple has brainwashed so many people with their 'privacy and security' BS to keep up their walled garden. MacOS and Windows are both open and reasonably well secured and private.
If Apple were smart they should have foreseen these problems and preemptively opened up parts of their systems.