Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
63,291
30,376



As part of a bipartisan investigation of competition in digital markets, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee today sent a letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook requesting that the company provide any documents and executive communications related to its various policies for the App Store, product repairs, and more.

app-store-ios-13.jpg

The investigation seeks any internal documents or communication involving Apple executives, such as emails, for the following topics:Apple's decision to remove from the App Store or to impose any restrictions on certain parental control apps, including Freedom, Kidslox, Mobicip, OurPact, and Qustodio
Apple's App Store algorithm for determining rankings in search results
Apple's policy related to the App Store's in-app purchase mechanism and its revenue split
Apple's policy regarding whether apps are permitted to include in-app links to non-Apple payment systems
Apple's policy regarding whether users can set non-Apple apps as default, such as web browsers and music, maps, and email apps
Apple's policy regarding whether to allow any third-party app store beyond the App Store on the iPhone
Apple's decision to "sherlock" any functionality from third-party apps, including any discussions about Clue, Duet Display, and SwiftKey
Apple's policy regarding whether third-party web browsers must use a specific rendering engine, such as WebKit
Apple's restrictions on third-party repairs
Apple's decision to offer discounted iPhone battery replacements throughout 2018, or the actual or projected effects of this decision, including any effect on iPhone sales
Apple's decision to introduce the Independent Repair Provider Program
Apple's agreement to sell products on Amazon and corresponding move to limit unauthorized resellers on AmazonThe Committee has requested that Apple respond no later than October 14, 2019 and also sent similar letters to Facebook, Amazon, and Google.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: U.S. House Committee Asks Apple to Send Info About App Store Policies and More as Part of Antitrust Investigation
 

heov

macrumors 6502
Aug 16, 2002
301
802
Incoming "it's Apple's store they can do what they want" comments from uneducated people.

Quit comparing the Apple Store to other stores. On iPhones, the App Store is the ONLY store. Because of this, Apple can potentially be anti-competitive (potentially is key word there, not saying they are).

These probes are warranted. Whether Apple is violating antitrust laws or not is up to the regulators.
 

az431

Suspended
Sep 13, 2008
2,131
6,122
Portland, OR
Too bad they mailed it to the wrong address.

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/d...se.gov/files/documents/Apple RFI - Signed.pdf
[doublepost=1568385884][/doublepost]
Incoming "it's Apple's store they can do what they want" comments from uneducated people.

Quit comparing the Apple Store to other stores. On iPhones, the App Store is the ONLY store. Because of this, Apple can potentially be anti-competitive (potentially is key word there, not saying they are).

These probes are warranted. Whether Apple is violating antitrust laws or not is up to the regulators.

Your definition of marketplace ("On iPhones, the App Store is the ONLY store") is contrary to antitrust law.

But whatever....
 

hasanahmad

macrumors 65816
May 20, 2009
1,426
1,561
Incoming "it's Apple's store they can do what they want" comments from uneducated people.

Quit comparing the Apple Store to other stores. On iPhones, the App Store is the ONLY store. Because of this, Apple can potentially be anti-competitive (potentially is key word there, not saying they are).

These probes are warranted. Whether Apple is violating antitrust laws or not is up to the regulators.

Apple store is the only store because it gives me as a consumer, the confidence than more often than not, Apple will protect my data from apps whose intention is to gather data and share it with outside. I have the confidence that more often than not Apple will block any apps which has potential malicious intent and unsuspecting consumers might install that app if not for the app store and wind up in a situation similar to the one google had last week where 30 million android devices had malware infused app

The walled garden approach has been in play since 2007+. its been over 12 years now. every iPhone owner today is aware of its existence. Every ipHone owner has purchased the iPhone despite knowing it because they have accepted that this is the approach they feel will make their phone more often than not more secure than other vendors .
 

Art Mark

macrumors 6502
Jan 6, 2010
480
1,192
Oregon
Incoming "it's Apple's store they can do what they want" comments from uneducated people.

Quit comparing the Apple Store to other stores. On iPhones, the App Store is the ONLY store. Because of this, Apple can potentially be anti-competitive (potentially is key word there, not saying they are).

These probes are warranted. Whether Apple is violating antitrust laws or not is up to the regulators.

Not sure you understand the issues, but regulators are certainly looking and have been. Any wrong along found won't be prosecutable under monopoly laws though unless they really stretch it and it will take years in the courts.
 

bobbie424242

macrumors 6502
May 16, 2015
342
595
BUUUUT.... it's Apple's store, they can do what they want !!!

Apple is god-tier and should not have to answer to anybody, not even $deity!

Won't anyone leave Apple alone ??!

[doublepost=1568388123][/doublepost]
Can you imagine if Apple imposed the same limitations and control on MacOS as it does on iOS?

And that's why we can thank computing history for general computers to have been invented before smartphones.
At the rate things are going, writing software will be considered criminal in 50 years unless you are whitelisted by <insert random organization here>.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: c0ppo and piecloud

Romeo_Nightfall

macrumors 65816
Aug 8, 2018
1,004
881
Vienna
Apple store is the only store because it gives me as a consumer, the confidence than more often than not, Apple will protect my data from apps whose intention is to gather data and share it with outside. I have the confidence that more often than not Apple will block any apps which has potential malicious intent and unsuspecting consumers might install that app if not for the app store and wind up in a situation similar to the one google had last week where 30 million android devices had malware infused app

The walled garden approach has been in play since 2007+. its been over 12 years now. every iPhone owner today is aware of its existence. Every ipHone owner has purchased the iPhone despite knowing it because they have accepted that this is the approach they feel will make their phone more often than not more secure than other vendors .

your Post is Full of nonsense!
1. Apple does NOT protect your data ... read several articles about it, recently
2. Apple does NOT block apps or remove them, see 1 — is Facebook on the Store?
3. buying an iPhone does NOT mean am happy with the one App Store Policy
4. regulations change for companies with their size and impact, that’s how it works

so practically everything You said is WRONG!
 

Defthand

macrumors 65816
Sep 1, 2010
1,351
1,712
Apple store is the only store because it gives me as a consumer, the confidence than more often than not, Apple will protect my data from apps whose intention is to gather data and share it with outside. I have the confidence that more often than not Apple will block any apps which has potential malicious intent and unsuspecting consumers might install that app if not for the app store and wind up in a situation similar to the one google had last week where 30 million android devices had malware infused app

The walled garden approach has been in play since 2007+. its been over 12 years now. every iPhone owner today is aware of its existence. Every ipHone owner has purchased the iPhone despite knowing it because they have accepted that this is the approach they feel will make their phone more often than not more secure than other vendors .

The App Store doesn't vette apps for malware. It's been outside researchers and affected users who discovered the offending apps that Apple later removed.

If the App Store makes you feel more secure, then continue using it. Unlike you, I prefer to get my apps straight from the source. I've done it for decades on MacOS and haven't regretted it. I feel more comfortable with the anti-virus/malware and network monitoring tools I have than Apple's imagined audits.

The iOS app store is popular because it is the only app store. Why is the MacOS app store not equally popular and successful?
 
  • Like
Reactions: c0ppo

DoctorTech

macrumors 6502a
Jan 6, 2014
736
1,962
Indianapolis, IN
These are not "regulators" looking into Apple, it is Congressman Jerry Nadler, Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee and the rest of the House Judiciary Committee. I don't know the backgrounds of all the members of the committee but I have my doubts about whether the committee leadership can even spell "Apple" let alone impartially evaluate their business model and the numerous trade offs between "walled gardens", app reviews, EULAs, etc. I would feel a little better if it really were "regulators" looking into this as they would be more likely to be knowledgeable about the technology and the market and they would likely be less partisan. Anyone who thinks the House Judiciary Committee is "bipartisan" hasn't been paying attention, it is probably the most partisan committee in the House.
 

Expos of 1969

Contributor
Aug 25, 2013
4,741
9,257
Apple store is the only store because it gives me as a consumer, the confidence than more often than not, Apple will protect my data from apps whose intention is to gather data and share it with outside. I have the confidence that more often than not Apple will block any apps which has potential malicious intent and unsuspecting consumers might install that app if not for the app store and wind up in a situation similar to the one google had last week where 30 million android devices had malware infused app

The walled garden approach has been in play since 2007+. its been over 12 years now. every iPhone owner today is aware of its existence. Every ipHone owner has purchased the iPhone despite knowing it because they have accepted that this is the approach they feel will make their phone more often than not more secure than other vendors .

Twice you use the term "more often than not". That could mean 51 times out of 100 or who knows. You certainly don't know. If that makes you feel at ease and confident that your data is safe carry on.
 

BuddyTronic

macrumors 68000
Jul 11, 2008
1,865
1,473
These are not "regulators" looking into Apple, it is Congressman Jerry Nadler, Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee and the rest of the House Judiciary Committee. I don't know the backgrounds of all the members of the committee but I have my doubts about whether the committee leadership can even spell "Apple" let alone impartially evaluate their business model and the numerous trade offs between "walled gardens", app reviews, EULAs, etc. I would feel a little better if it really were "regulators" looking into this as they would be more likely to be knowledgeable about the technology and the market and they would likely be less partisan. Anyone who thinks the House Judiciary Committee is "bipartisan" hasn't been paying attention, it is probably the most partisan committee in the House.

Yes, that’s a big problem. These politicians really show their ignorance when you watch any coverage of them on TV. It’s very close to being silly sometimes.

If there are any good intentions in these probes, it is usually lost due to the ignorance of the politicians involved - I don’t care if they are Republican or Democrat.
 

NufSaid

macrumors 6502
Oct 28, 2015
435
752
ÜT: 41.065573,-83.668801
I cannot imagine my business or running a business facing these requests into the internal thinking‘s of strategy.

If they can determine a crime has been committed or fully appears to have been committed did they can investigate but this is madness.
[doublepost=1568389914][/doublepost]Honestly, the Democrats loved technology and text companies until they perceived (Wrongly) that Facebook allowed Trump to be elected and not their own policies and incompetencies.

Now they are suddenly pretending to be the overlords of tech because their perception is where the government and we will protect the poor little people who cannot think for themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuddyTronic

Gasu E.

macrumors 603
Mar 20, 2004
5,029
3,145
Not far from Boston, MA.
These are not "regulators" looking into Apple, it is Congressman Jerry Nadler, Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee and the rest of the House Judiciary Committee. I don't know the backgrounds of all the members of the committee but I have my doubts about whether the committee leadership can even spell "Apple" let alone impartially evaluate their business model and the numerous trade offs between "walled gardens", app reviews, EULAs, etc. I would feel a little better if it really were "regulators" looking into this as they would be more likely to be knowledgeable about the technology and the market and they would likely be less partisan. Anyone who thinks the House Judiciary Committee is "bipartisan" hasn't been paying attention, it is probably the most partisan committee in the House.

Well, it is what it is. Regulators may themselves be more knowledgable, but their work is mostly invisible to us regular people. Congress has the power, through open hearings, to require corporate executives to answer questions under the public gaze. So, do you prefer to rely 100% on the murky workings of (hopefully expert) regulators, or would you rather get information and evaluate for yourself? Personally, I think they both have value; and, except in cases of criminal intent, their efforts generally don't conflict.
 

BuddyTronic

macrumors 68000
Jul 11, 2008
1,865
1,473
I cannot imagine my business or running a business facing these requests into the internal thinking‘s of strategy.

If they can determine a crime has been committed or fully appears to have been committed did they can investigate but this is madness.
[doublepost=1568389914][/doublepost]Honestly, the Democrats loved technology and text companies until they perceived (Wrongly) that Facebook allowed Trump to be elected and not their own policies and incompetencies.

Now they are suddenly pretending to be the overlords of tech because their perception is where the government and we will protect the poor little people who cannot think for themselves.

The mentality of some of these committees and government groups is sickening sometimes. Resentful and ignorant and corrupt.

I guess these big companies can afford to do the paperwork - but as a small business owner, it’s more of the same lack of respect for entrepreneurship - that’s how I see it.

If you become successful, these guys crawl out from under the rocks to cause trouble for you. Invariably - even if it’s disguised as “trying to help”
 

frankly

macrumors 6502a
May 6, 2003
645
84
To me, the first item requested, "Apple's App Store algorithm for determining rankings in search results," shows the ridiculous nature of this inquiry. You would NEVER hear someone ask for Google's search algorithm but this is the equivalent of that. I'm all for oversight but you can't ask a company to divulge trade secrets to a group of people who will not maintain that secrecy.
 

realtuner

Suspended
Mar 8, 2019
1,714
5,053
Canada
All the big tech companies are being investigated. And of all these companies Apple by far has the least to worry about.

Say the government starts cracking down on various behaviors. The worst that could happen to Apple would be to make slight changes to The App Store (maybe changes to fees). Or they have to open up to third party stores. This will cost Apple some revenue, but nothing that will significant hurt them.

However, if the government puts restrictions on data mining they could literally wipe out a major source of revenue for companies like Facebook or Google. They’re the ones who should be worried.

Further, Google has a monopoly in search, browser, online ads, maps, mail and video service (YouTube). Google is ripe for the picking with so many potential targets for regulators.
 
  • Like
Reactions: c0ppo

cubedweller

macrumors 6502
Nov 25, 2007
304
52
Well, it is what it is. Regulators may themselves be more knowledgable, but their work is mostly invisible to us regular people. Congress has the power, through open hearings, to require corporate executives to answer questions under the public gaze. So, do you prefer to rely 100% on the murky workings of (hopefully expert) regulators, or would you rather get information and evaluate for yourself? Personally, I think they both have value; and, except in cases of criminal intent, their efforts generally don't conflict.

Not only this, but Congress has the power and authority to -- gasp! -- create new laws/regulations if they feel Apple's actions are contrary to the public good, irrespective of current laws. So all the people claiming that Apple's behavior doesn't even "violate antitrust laws" are missing the point entirely. Congress is -- and should be -- trying to determine if these laws need updating to deal with the likes of Apple, Google, Facebook, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech

DoctorTech

macrumors 6502a
Jan 6, 2014
736
1,962
Indianapolis, IN
Well, it is what it is. Regulators may themselves be more knowledgable, but their work is mostly invisible to us regular people. Congress has the power, through open hearings, to require corporate executives to answer questions under the public gaze. So, do you prefer to rely 100% on the murky workings of (hopefully expert) regulators, or would you rather get information and evaluate for yourself? Personally, I think they both have value; and, except in cases of criminal intent, their efforts generally don't conflict.
I'm all for transparency but I hate word games and political theater (that is not a partisan statement, both sides do it).

Big Tech CEOs have already testified before Congress and in my opinion some have perjured themselves when asked questions dealing with privacy / data sharing practices. I say "in my opinion" because they carefully wordsmith their answers to be technically correct while extremely misleading. "No, we didn't sell anyone's information." What they don't say is that they did "lease" it to another company or "traded" it in exchange for access to other information. They walk away having reassured everyone that their data was "safe" because of carefully crafted answers.

I have been examined under oath by FDA auditors when I worked for a medical device company. While I am all for transparency, I really do believe you get to the truth a lot quicker behind closed doors with knowledgable auditors / regulators talking with front line and middle management employees rather than politicians grandstanding on camera with CEOs. Maybe it would work better if a real investigation started behind closed doors to establish what was really going on then once the facts were established, the CEO was called before the cameras to explain what had been discovered in the investigation (i.e. tell their side of it and defend whatever was discovered).
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.