The law, enforced since March 2024, compels tech firms classified as “gatekeepers”, including Apple, Google, Meta and Amazon, to open their platforms to third parties, permit alternative app stores and payment systems, and end practices such as self-preferencing. It is currently under review, with the European Commission receiving stakeholder feedback up to September 24.

Apple says these policies are already limiting what customers in Europe can access. According to the company, several new features have been delayed, including iPhone-to-Mac mirroring, live translation with AirPods, and enhanced location-based tools in Maps. 

Apple says these features depend on its tightly integrated ecosystem and cannot be safely extended to third-party platforms without risking user data.

“It’s become clear that we can’t solve every problem the DMA creates,” Apple said. “Over time, it’s become clear that the DMA isn’t helping markets. It’s making it harder to do business in Europe.”

The Commission has dismissed Apple’s objections, stressing that obligations under the law are not negotiable. A spokesperson noted: “Gatekeepers, like Apple, must allow interoperability of third-party devices with their operating systems.”

The issue reveals how far governments can push top tech firms to open their systems without damaging user safety. Apple argues that sideloading apps and the rise of alternative marketplaces, both required under the DMA, expose consumers to scams, malware and pornography apps that were previously blocked from its App Store. The company says younger users and those less experienced with technology are most at risk.

Apple’s case aligns with concerns raised in Washington, where former U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration repeatedly condemned the DMA as discriminatory against American technology firms. 

The issue has also come with penalties: in April, Apple and Meta were fined for non-compliance, with Apple facing a €500 million sanction over restrictions on developer communications.

Reports from policy think tanks such as EPICENTER and ITIF have added weight to Apple’s stance, arguing that the DMA’s rigid design risks stifling innovation, delaying product rollouts and spreading compliance costs to smaller businesses.

The European Commission maintains that the law is essential to increase competition and consumer choice. Its first formal review is expected to determine whether the rules will be tightened further, potentially extending obligations to social networks.

Apple has made it clear it will continue to comply with legal requirements, but it is also noting that the EU regulation may come at a high cost for users, fewer features, slower innovation and, paradoxically, weaker protections.

The company argues that the fine and the obligations tied to it go far beyond what the law actually requires.

The issue traces back to the European Commission’s April ruling, which found Apple guilty of restricting app developers from directing users to cheaper alternatives outside the App Store.

According to the Commission, Apple’s actions violated the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a law designed to curb the dominance of major tech companies.

On Monday, the final day allowed for a legal challenge, the iPhone maker submitted its appeal. In a statement, Apple said:

“Today we filed our appeal because we believe the European Commission’s decision—and their unprecedented fine—go far beyond what the law requires. As our appeal will show, the EC is mandating how we run our store and forcing business terms which are confusing for developers and bad for users. We implemented this to avoid punitive daily fines and will share the facts with the Court.”

The company believes the European Commission is now telling it how to manage its own business in ways that damage the developer community and worsen user experience.

In June, Apple tried to revise its App Store policies across the European Union to comply with the DMA and avoid further daily fines, which could have reached as high as €50 million per day, about 5% of Apple’s average daily global turnover.

The changes Apple introduced, however, have triggered new controversy. The company unveiled a complex, tiered commission system: developers now face either a 5% or 13% fee, plus a separate 2% user acquisition charge if they want better visibility in the App Store, such as appearing in search suggestions or getting promotional spots. Apple insists these adjustments were forced by the Commission’s demands.

The company is also now allowing developers to steer users to payment options outside the App Store, but Apple claims the Commission’s definition of “steering” was unlawfully expanded, covering more developer activities than it should.

While Apple argues that no other app store in the world operates under such conditions, the European Commission is pressing ahead. It is currently gathering feedback from developers to assess whether Apple’s latest changes are sufficient or if more corrective measures will be needed.

Over the years, the European Commission has issued fines against several tech giants, including Alphabet’s Google, which has accumulated more than $8 billion in penalties. Apple itself was previously ordered to pay Ireland €13 billion in back taxes.

Apple’s latest appeal adds yet another chapter to its long-running legal battles over the control and structure of its App Store, not just in Europe, but globally. In the United States, Apple has already been forced to allow developers to direct users to external payment options, potentially threatening billions in annual revenue.

If the CMA designates Google under this new status, enabled by powers granted under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act that took effect earlier this year, the tech giant would face a set of binding obligations. 

These include offering users alternatives to Google Search, giving publishers more control over how their content is used, and ensuring that businesses have fair access to search visibility. Simply put, the UK is moving to weaken Google’s grip on online discovery.

“Google search accounts for more than 90% of all general search queries in the UK, with millions of people relying on it as a key gateway to the internet,” said Sarah Cardell, CEO of the CMA. “If competition was working well, we would expect these costs to be lower.”

The regulator is particularly concerned about the implications of Google’s market monopoly on innovation, business costs, and user choice. In 2023 alone, UK businesses reportedly spent over £33,000 per advertiser on Google search ads, a figure the CMA believes reflects limited competitive pressure.

Should the SMS designation go through, Google would be required to implement “choice screens” that allow users to switch easily between competing search engines, including potentially AI-driven assistants. 

It would also have to ensure transparent and non-discriminatory search result rankings, a demand long stated by publishers and rival firms.

Another focus is how Google’s AI-enabled search features, such as AI Overviews, use third-party content. The CMA wants publishers to have more say in how their work is used, particularly given that such content often drive these AI-generated results without sufficient visibility or compensation.

The regulator hasn’t shied away from the fact that this is a transition in oversight. While the EU has already introduced digital regulations under the Digital Markets Act, the UK is opting for a case-by-case, targeted approach that still carries substantial consequences. 

The CMA now has the authority to impose fines and enforce decisions directly, a post-Brexit empowerment it intends to wield.

Google, unsurprisingly, has objected. “Punitive regulation could stop us bringing new features and services to Britain,” warned Oliver Bethell, Google’s senior director for competition. He added, “Proportionate, evidence-based regulation will be essential to preventing the CMA’s roadmap from becoming a roadblock to growth in the UK.”

Though the CMA is quick to stress that its proposed intervention is not a judgment of wrongdoing, it’s also clear that the agency believes Google has used its authority to suppress innovation. 

Beyond traditional search, the CMA also plans to monitor how generative AI technologies, which Google is increasingly embedding into search, may further entrench the company’s position. 

For now, the Gemini AI Assistant will not be covered under the proposed designation, but the regulator says this could change depending on how the technology evolves and is adopted.

This isn’t the only front on which Google faces such in the UK. The CMA is also examining its control over the Android mobile operating system in a separate probe, which could lead to an additional SMS designation targeting mobile software.

Globally, Google’s regulatory issues are increasing. It’s been hit with landmark antitrust cases in the United States, and in the EU it faces accusations of violating digital platform rules. 

The CMA is currently collecting input from industry stakeholders. Its final decision is expected by 13 October 2025.

The European Commission’s decision was triggered by a 2019 complaint by Swedish music streaming service Spotify over this restriction and Apple’s 30% App Store fees.

The European Union competition enforcer said Apple’s restrictions constituted unfair trading conditions, a relatively novel argument in an antitrust case and also used by the Dutch antitrust agency in a decision against Apple in 2021 in a case brought by dating app providers.

The EU competition enforcer said it added an additional lump sum of 1.8 billion euros to the basic amount as a deterrent to Apple and because a significant part of the harm caused by Apple’s conduct was non-monetary. It did not say what the basic amount was.

“”For a decade, Apple abused its dominant position in the market for the distribution of music streaming apps through the App Store,” EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager said in a statement.

“They did so by restricting developers from informing consumers about alternative, cheaper music services available outside of the Apple ecosystem. This is illegal under EU antitrust rules,” she said.

“The decision was reached despite the Commission’s failure to uncover any credible evidence of consumer harm, and ignores the realities of a market that is thriving, competitive, and growing fast,” the company said in a statement.

“The primary advocate for this decision — and the biggest beneficiary — is Spotify, a company based in Stockholm, Sweden. Spotify has the largest music streaming app in the world, and has met with the European Commission more than 65 times during this investigation,” it said.

It said the Swedish company pays no commission to Apple as it sells its subscriptions on its website and not on Apple’s App Store.

Vestager’s order to Apple to remove its App Store restrictions echoes the same requirement under new EU tech rules known as the Digital Markets Act (DMA) which Apple has to comply with on March 7.

Apple’s fine, however, is about a quarter of the 8.25 billion euro fines the EU regulator meted out to Alphabet’s Google in three cases in the previous decade.

In contrast to the music streaming case, Apple is seeking to settle another EU antitrust investigation by offering to open up its tap-and-go mobile payment systems to rivals.

EU regulators, who subsequently sought feedback from rivals and users, will likely accept its offer without fining the company.

This new development in the WhatsApp social application comes just a month before the Digital Markets Act (DMA) deadline, for tech platforms to make the transfer of personal data from one service to another seamless.

In an interview with Wired, Dick Brouwer, WhatsApp’s engineering director, disclosed the company’s preparedness to roll out interoperability while steadfastly safeguarding user privacy and security. Brouwer noted the essential balance between facilitating seamless cross-platform communication and ensuring WhatsApp’s uncompromising privacy standards.

The European Union’s inclusion of messaging interoperability under the DMA in 2022 prompted WhatsApp, alongside other gatekeepers like Messenger, to open their doors to third-party chat apps. Meta, WhatsApp’s parent company, is also ready to extend support for other chat apps to Messenger in compliance with the EU mandate.

Initially focusing on one-on-one chats, the interoperability feature will enable users to exchange text, audio, video, images, and files seamlessly across various apps. As previously reported by WABetaInfo, this functionality will be housed in a dedicated sub-menu labelled “Third-party chats” atop the inbox.

Brouwer noted that the interoperability feature would be opt-in to mitigate potential risks of spam and scams. Companies seeking interoperability with Meta’s system will be required to enter into agreements, the details of which are yet to be disclosed. WhatsApp insists on end-to-end encryption to ensure secure communication across platforms, although the specifics of compliance may evolve given recent developments in Apple’s App Store policies.

Matthew Hodgson, the founder of the open-source messaging protocol Matrix, disclosed in a recent talk that his company had engaged in experimental collaboration with WhatsApp to preserve end-to-end encryption while exploring interoperability options.

While the intentions of major operators like Telegram, and Google regarding interoperability with WhatsApp remain undefined, Brouwer cautioned that achieving feature parity between third-party chats and WhatsApp’s native chats might bring in new challenges in privacy and security.