/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

Italy's antitrust agency opens probe into allegations that Apple and Samsung used software updates to slow phones and induce customers to buy newer models

ROME (Reuters) - Italy's antitrust body said on Thursday it had opened a probe into allegations that Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics

Reuters Crispian Balmer

Context & Ripple Effects

This January 2018 probe is the opening move in what becomes a sustained campaign by Italy's AGCM against Apple's software and platform conduct. By October of the same year the regulator converts the investigation into €5M fines against both Apple and Samsung over the throttling complaints, plus an additional €5M on Apple alone for failing to give users clear information about battery replacement.

The throttling case also sets the template for the agency's later work: subsequent AGCM investigations target Apple's exemption of its own apps from App Tracking Transparency, its suspected curbs on non-official Beats headphone resellers alongside Amazon, and eventually a DMA interoperability probe into iOS cloud services.

First-order effects

  • Apple and Samsung must now defend their software-update practices before Italy's antitrust authority, with the immediate exposure being fines and a mandated explanation of why updates degraded phone performance.

Second-order effects

  • A finding against either vendor forces changes to how updates are disclosed and tested across the EU's national regulators, since the same throttling allegations travel easily between jurisdictions once one authority validates them.

Third-order effects

  • If the pattern holds — and the AGCM's later probes into Apple's ATT exemptions, Beats distribution, and DMA interoperability suggest it does — national competition authorities become the primary enforcement layer for smartphone platform conduct, long before EU-level digital rules fully bite.

The trend: European national competition regulators are shifting from one-off consumer complaints to systematic, repeat scrutiny of how Apple and Samsung use software control over devices to shape upgrade behavior.