Sources: the EU has determined that Apple's anti-steering rules for developers do not comply with the DMA, and plans charges against Apple in the coming weeks
Brussels to announce iPhone maker is failing to adhere to new rules designed to open up its app store to competition
Financial Times
Context & Ripple Effects
This report moves Apple’s App Store rules from earlier EU antitrust scrutiny toward enforcement under the DMA. The dispute had already centered on whether App Store terms restrict competing services, including the EU’s earlier planned action over rules affecting music-streaming rivals.
The immediate issue is not App Store access itself but whether developers can tell customers about offers beyond it. Related coverage later records preliminary DMA findings on Apple’s anti-steering rules, making this report an early step in a more formal enforcement track.
First-order effects
Apple faces prospective DMA charges over its developer anti-steering terms, requiring it to defend or revise how developers communicate external offers.
Developers gain regulatory backing for challenging limits on directing users to cheaper or alternative purchasing options outside Apple’s store.
Second-order effects
A finding against Apple would pressure other gatekeeper platforms to reassess steering restrictions and the fees or conditions attached to alternative purchase paths.
Payment providers and developers could see greater demand for off-store purchase flows if compliance requires more meaningful external linking or promotion.
Third-order effects
The case tests whether the DMA can shift platform competition from access rules to the commercial terms governing how users are routed and billed.
If enforcement consistently targets anti-steering provisions, gatekeepers’ ability to preserve store economics through contractual design may weaken, though the eventual remedy remains uncertain.
The trend: DMA enforcement is increasingly focused on whether gatekeepers’ implementation details preserve control over developer distribution and customer payments.
If I were Apple, I'd just disregard the DMA rules entirely and let the rogue European Commission levy whatever fines it wants because anyway, no matter what Apple does, the commissioners are going to find *something* to fine Apple for. They're proud of what they're doing and no …
The EU does not approve approaches to regulation even though the company announces intents and provides details. Rather vendors keep guessing and then this. Also, before vendors find out they announce it to the TImes “according to three people with close knowledge.” [image]
These beatings will continue until Apple pays Spotify/Epic/randos/etc for the privilege of distributing their apps to billions of users, because logic. Seems legit to me.
The EU is going to assert a DMA violation by Apple because of its steering rules and the commission it charges. Note that this is also an issue with respect to the Spotify decision that the EU Commission made under traditional antitrust law. Apple will argue its fees are FRAND:…
“Brussels is set to charge Apple over allegedly stifling competition on its mobile app store, the first time EU regulators have used new digital rules to target a Big Tech group” Let's hope the fines are big enough to trigger a change. https://arstechnica.com/...
Dollars to donuts, these are EC people leaking, unfortunately. This Commission has serially prosecuted cases in public instead of undertaking objective investigations. “Geopolitical Commission”. It's harshly criticised when others do the same, and yet it continues. [image]
Oh snap! EU thinks Apple is not complying with DMA anti-steering rules. Reminder: The EU *itself* leaks to FT Fine is $50M per DAY 🍿💥 https://www.ft.com/...