European politicians and advocacy groups insist that the region’s legislation is not tough enough to break up the monopolies of big tech companies. Last week, two open letters were sent to regulators criticizing how Apple and Google remain undeterred.
On January 16, four digital rights groups He responded to the proposed measures By the European Commission for Apple to ensure interoperability with iOS and iPadOS. They claim that Apple’s current process for handling interoperability requests is complex, which discourages developers from submitting them.
“Gatekeeper” organizations – the most prominent technology companies operating in Europe, including Apple and Alphabet, Google’s parent company – must provide third parties with the tools they need to make their software and hardware products work seamlessly with their own, according to the Digital Markets Act. .
SEE: EU approves NVIDIA deal with Run:ai, pushes for Apple interoperability
The next day, the Club of Madrid, a network of former European heads of state, expressed its support for the Commission to “end Google’s monopoly on digital advertising technologies” through forced divestiture.
“Google’s absolute dominance, resulting from its 2007 acquisition of DoubleClick, has stifled competition and consolidated its control over every segment of the ad technology market,” the 18 leaders wrote in a statement. letter.
In June 2023, the Commission informed Google that A “Mandatory liquidation” Part of its ad tech business would be the only way to address competition concerns. This came after the investigation yielded a preliminary view that the company had violated EU antitrust rules. According to the Madrid club’s message, the committee will announce the final result soon.
Digital advocacy groups say Apple can still avoid interoperability with existing digital markets law
In September 2024, the European Commission I started two cases The DMA directs Apple to promote interoperability between iOS, iPadOS, and third-party devices like smartwatches and headphones. Then, in December, it published its report Initial results and suggested treatments.
Recommended actions include improving compatibility between iOS and device features such as smart watches and earbuds. These features include notifications, automatic Wi-Fi connections, AirPlay, AirDrop, and automatic audio switching via Bluetooth.
See: Meta and Apple violate digital markets law, EU tariffs
The panel also suggested that Apple make the process for enabling developers to request interoperability within iOS and iPadOS features more transparent and predictable. This includes providing clear information about its internal features and timely order status updates.
However, the Commission’s proposals are “clearly flawed and structurally incapable of delivering effective interoperability,” the Free Software Foundation in Europe, Article 19, European Digital and Data Rights Foundation said. in letterThe groups recommend that Apple:
- Embracing interoperability by design because it is “required by DMA letter” rather than relying on a reactive, demand-based model.
- It is not permitted to “enforce non-disclosure agreements in its sole discretion” that block access to APIs.
- A uniform and freely accessible interoperability request form should be made available to developers, allocate sufficient resources to handle it, and provide greater transparency about the status of the request or denial.
- Not be able to use security claims to prevent effective interoperability.
- We encourage you to provide “flexible” third-party APIs in response to interoperability requests, which meet diverse developer needs.
- Improve or fix its system to address interoperability-related bugs.
They also suggest that the Commission appoint neutral conciliators to resolve disputes and prevent Apple’s bias.
In response to the measures proposed by the committee, Apple published a document Explaining how granting access to its technology stack, and therefore user data, can put privacy and security at risk. He highlighted how Meta had made 15 requests to access Apple’s software tools, which, if granted, would provide troves of user data, and that the company had “repeatedly been fined by regulators for privacy violations.”
See: Meta offers less personalized ads to EU users to please regulators
Meta Communications Director Andy Stone This is answered in X: “This is what Apple is actually saying: They don’t believe in interoperability. In fact, every time Apple is criticized for anti-competitive behavior, it is defending itself on privacy grounds that have no basis in reality.”
Former European heads of state say Google’s dominance of the ad tech sector puts democracy at risk
The digital advertising technology sector, known as the “ad tech stack,” includes many intermediaries that facilitate the sale of advertising online. Google has four of them: Google Ads, DV360, AdX, and DoubleClick For Publishers.
Advertisers use Google Ads and DV360 to bid for ad space on websites and apps. DoubleClick For Publishers is a platform for website and app managers where they can list their available advertising space. AdX connects the two by matching the highest bidding advertiser with the website or app manager in a real-time auction.
The Madrid club described this setup as “as if Goldman or Citibank owned the New York Stock Exchange.” Google’s ownership of a significant portion of its advertising technology portfolio means that “democracy in Europe remains at risk” despite the publication of its groundbreaking DMA and Digital Services Act.
The group, which includes former heads of state from France, the Netherlands, Austria, Greece, Sweden, Belgium, Finland and Poland, said Europe’s “reliance on foreign platforms” affecting news organizations’ bottom lines could erode local journalism. Which ultimately led to the spread of misinformation, political and otherwise.
The Madrid Club made two recommendations in its letter:
- Regulators must be given the resources and authority to implement structural remedies that will restore fair competition, following decisive action in the ongoing Google investigation.
- The Commission should actively seek to foster European innovation – for example by supporting start-ups, enforcing the Digital Direct Access Act (DMA) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), and building an independent digital infrastructure.
The second point specifically addresses recent criticism that underfunding and over-regulation have led to a technology gap between Europe and other global superpowers such as the United States, as only four of the world’s 50 largest technology companies are European.
FC Madrid also supports the sentiments expressed by Teresa Ribera, the new European Competition Commissioner Bloomberg TV She said that the matter of divestment from Google is still on the table.
In response to the letter, a Google spokesperson told… Wall Street Journal“As we said before, although we disagree with the European Commission’s view, we have been engaging constructively.” They added that the company is committed to creating value for publishers and advertisers.
Authorities around the world have objected to Google’s advertising practices. The UK Competition and Markets Authority provisionally ruled that Google’s dominance of the ad tech market hurts rivals in September.
The Alphabet-owned company is also facing a similar antitrust lawsuit from A A group of online publishers In the United Kingdom. Ad tech teamwork The court alleges that Google abused its dominant position in the digital advertising technology sector, resulting in losses worth £13.6 billion.
across the pond, An ongoing investigation by the US Department of Justice It alleges that Google “illegally used its distribution agreements to thwart competition.” Additionally, in August, a federal judge ruled that the technology company had a monopoly on general search and text advertising services and violated antitrust law.
However, Google does not take these accusations seriously. In September, the technology company successfully overturned a €1.5 billion antitrust fine it received from the European Commission in 2019 for preventing third parties using its AdSense platform from displaying competing ads next to Google search results.