Dutch antitrust regulator orders Apple to let dating apps in the App Store offer alternative payment systems by January 15 or face up to a €50M fine
The Netherlands' top competition regulator on Friday said Apple Inc (AAPL.O) broke the country's competition laws and ordered changes …
Reuters
Context & Ripple Effects
The Dutch regulator’s order turned App Store billing from a platform-policy question into an enforceable local requirement for one app category. Follow-up coverage shows Apple made a Jan. 15 commitment to alternative payments, then characterized its Dutch implementation as a minor technical change, putting the adequacy of compliance—not merely the deadline—at the center of the dispute.
First-order effects
Apple must provide a way for dating-app developers in the Netherlands to offer payment options outside its standard in-app purchase system or risk fines capped at €50 million.
Dutch dating-app developers gain a regulator-backed route to present alternative payment systems to their local users, subject to Apple’s implementation rules.
Second-order effects
Apple’s response shifts the regulator’s task from ordering a policy change to assessing whether Apple’s specific payment-flow changes satisfy the order; Apple later said they did in its February letter.
Dating-app developers must decide whether the new payment path is operationally preferable to Apple’s in-app purchase route, making checkout design and payment handling an immediate competitive variable.
Third-order effects
The case establishes a localized model for constraining a platform’s control over app billing: enforcement can focus on access to alternatives while leaving the platform to design the technical mechanism.
If that implementation-focused approach holds, disputes over platform take rates are likely to move from blanket store rules toward category- and jurisdiction-specific compliance terms.
The trend: App-store payment control is becoming a regulatory enforcement issue, with remedies increasingly defined by the technical terms under which developers can reach alternative billing.
The patchwork of payments requirements from various countries' regulatory bodies is more sustainable for Apple than for developers. Most recently: Netherlands competition board rules that Apple must allow *dating apps* to use alternative payments methods https://www.reuters.com/.…
Note: this is a big win for Match Group, which you probably know better thanks to @Tinder — company has been part of a growing coalition anti app store-practices. South Korea was another win for them, as we reported in November: https://pro.politico.eu/... https://twitter.com/...
Not the Christmas gift Apple hoped it would get: Dutch competition authority orders App Store tweaks, including using other payment systems than Apple's systems. https://www.acm.nl/...
(1) Incredible Christmas gift for those fighting for fair treament of app developers by @Apple. Rotterdam court rules that the @AutoriteitCM was right to find the obligation for dating apps providers to use Apple's in app payment solution breaches Article 102 TFEU. @appfairness
Big Tech monopolies are holding the digital marketplace hostage. My antitrust bills restore competition without overextending the government's control over the market. https://www.reuters.com/...
“Today's Rotterdam Court ruling confirms that the ACM was right to find that the obligation imposed by Apple on dating app developers to use its in-app payment system (IAP) breaches EU and Dutch competition law.” Read our full statement: https://appfairness.org/...
The App Store being declared an abusive monopoly across various countries (Russia, Japan, Netherlands, etc) seems unlikely to get Apple to ease off choking the creator economy by collecting 30% tax for IAPs. They're appealing every case & resisting hard. https://www.reuters.com/.…
2/ It's cumbersome and inconvenient for app developers to implement payments methods for various countries (especially small countries like NL). I dont see these country-level rulings as cumulatively putting pressure on Apple to implement a new global policy
I'd assumed the brand tarnish of leaked emails and being declared an abusive monopoly on every continent would cause Apple to yield on the 30% cut but I was wrong. With iPhone sales plateaued, squeezing money out of app developers is a revenue growth strategy they can't give up.