A look at the Open App Markets Act, aimed at curbing anti-competitive behavior from large app store operators like Apple and Google and headed to a Senate vote
it is hardly clear how that would shake out in practice: e.g., denying API access to Parler, denying App store access—might be viewed in different ways by different courts. 3/3 Craig Aaron / @notaaroncraig : Good question. https://www.protocol.com/... Nu Wexler / @wexler : “The usual suspects who want tech to do more to stop harmful content from spreading online have been unusually quiet about the possibility that the antitrust bills now headed to the Senate floor might actually undermine that work.” https://www.protocol.com/... Anupam Chander / @anupamchander : This is a great piece, and so grateful for @issielapowsky's coverage. The confident assertion by a proponent of the bills that the deplatforming lawsuits brought by Parler et al. would fail is, in my opinion, surprising. Have they looked at makeup of current Supreme Court? 1/2 https://twitter.com/... @issielapowsky : NEW: Progressive groups have been mighty quiet about concerns that the Senate antitrust bills might make it harder for platforms to moderate content, even as Cruz and others have said that's what they like about the bills. I dug into the reasons why. https://www.protocol.com/... Colin Crowell / @colincrowell : Concerns raised that antitrust bills may harm fight vs misinformation “They also noted that even if these bills pass, that wouldn't make Sec 230 go away, meaning tech platforms would still have an important legal shield to rely on for content moderation”↘️ https://www.protocol.com/... Tim Karr / @timkarr : Thanks to @issielapowsky for giving space to @FreePressAction's principled and thoroughly considered stance against this bad antitrust bill. And also for recognizing the dangers lurking behind @SenTedCruz's enthusiastic support. https://www.protocol.com/... @berinszoka : S.2710 is supposed to bar Big Tech companies from preferencing their own/their partners' offerings over everyone else's But 3(e) is worded to allow broader claims. Republicans will use it to harass tech services over content moderation The fix is easy: https://techfreedom.org/... https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/... Karl Bode / @karlbode : I guess people still don't know this despite 40 years of historical record, but the GOP is never going to vote when it matters in favor of meaningful antitrust reform. Not without dumb caveats that undermine the effort. https://www.protocol.com/... Krishna Rao / @raokrishna : Some good measures in the bill. But allowing third-party app stores and allowing apps to be installed without security checks is going to be a nightmare. https://www.theverge.com/... Eli Dourado / @elidourado : It is absolutely mind-blowing to me that in this age of deep polarization the one thing our Members of Congress can agree on is that they must punish the only industry that is doing what it is supposed to be doing. https://www.theverge.com/... https://twitter.com/... Barbara Krasnoff / @barbarakrasnoff : Really interesting article about how impending legislation could affect the way you add apps to your smartphone -whether you use Android or iOS. https://www.theverge.com/... via @Verge
Context & Ripple Effects
The Open App Markets Act reaching the Senate floor is the legislative payoff of a two-year buildup: the 450-page House Judiciary report accusing Big Tech of buying and crushing rivals became the blueprint, and Rep. Cicilline's push to stop Apple from blocking removal of pre-installed apps previewed the app-store-specific provisions now in the bill.
The bill also collides with a separate policy thread: the same platforms being ordered open are the ones making moderation calls, and the description flags the unresolved question of how courts will treat deplatforming decisions like denying App Store or API access to Parler. Apple and Google are already fighting the parallel Digital Markets Act in the EU, and later reporting showed the self-preferencing bill facing resistance from Senate Democrats worried about the midterms — so the vote's outcome is genuinely uncertain.
First-order effects
- Apple and Google face a Senate vote that could legally bar their app stores from favoring their own products, forcing changes to pre-installed apps and store rules on iOS and Android.
- Platforms' deplatforming decisions — denying store or API access — become potential legal flashpoints, with observers warning the bill's antitrust duties may be read by courts as constraining moderation.
Second-order effects
- Content-safety advocates go quiet or split: as Nu Wexler's comment in the piece notes, the usual voices pushing platforms to curb harmful content have not engaged with the risk that antitrust mandates undercut that work.
- Apple and Google must run a two-front defense, contesting the US bill while criticizing the EU's gatekeeper designation regime, and app developers gain leverage to challenge store terms in court rather than only in public.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds on both sides of the Atlantic, app store distribution shifts from private platform discretion to regulated gatekeeping, with Congress and the EU Commission — not Apple and Google — setting the rules of access.
- US law will have to reconcile antitrust openness mandates with content-moderation immunity debates like the Section 230 fights, because the same chokepoint the bill opens is the lever platforms use for deplatforming.
The trend: US legislation is converging with the EU's Digital Markets Act on forcing app store gatekeepers open, with the collision between mandated openness and content moderation as the unresolved fault line.