When the EU wielded the big stick of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) to force Apple to open up...Sideloading and Third-Party PaymentAt that time, Britain, separated by the English Channel, chose a completely different path.
Although the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) determined last year that Apple and Google had a "strategic market status" duopoly in the mobile platform market, it ultimately decided to adopt a "light touch" approach.
According toOfficial announcementThe UK Competition and Markets Authority announced that it will accept the "commitment" of Apple and Google, believing that they will operate their respective software marketplaces "fairly" without resorting to direct legislative intervention as the European Union has done.
As long as you obediently promise, we will not legislate.
The UK Competition and Markets Authority's "pragmatic" strategy focuses on accepting Apple and Google's commitments to improve areas such as app review processes, ranking algorithms, data usage, and interoperability. In particular, when a developer's app competes with Apple's or Google's own services (such as Spotify competing with Apple Music), all developers must be treated fairly.
However, Tom Smith, former head of the UK Competition and Markets Authority, told the Financial Times that these UK rules are more like "advice" and "not legally binding" under any circumstances. This contrasts sharply with the EU's Digital Markets Law, which mandates Apple to open up iOS features, allow external app installations, and reduce transaction fees.
Listen to their words and observe their actions: if they violate the rules, then we can talk.
While the regulation is lenient, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is not entirely laissez-faire. The CMA plans to monitor various data points to ensure the two companies adhere to their commitments, including the number of apps approved or rejected, review times, and developer complaints.
The UK Competition and Markets Authority has warned that if Apple is found to have unjustifiably refused interoperability requests, or if Google is found to be playing double games, more specific and mandatory requirements may be introduced in the future. "Failure to honor commitments means we are unlikely to consider using this 'commitment' approach to resolve issues in the future."
Google welcomed the opportunity to "cooperate in solving problems" regarding this decision, while Apple emphasized that it allows them to continue driving innovation in privacy and security. The implication is that both companies are relieved not to be forced to open up their sideloading capabilities.
Are they afraid of offending the Trump administration?
The UK's decision to "step back gently" may also be driven by geopolitical considerations. French President Emmanuel Macron recently predicted at a summit that with the Trump administration in power, the US would certainly attack the EU in areas such as digital regulation and digital taxation in the coming months. To avoid angering the new US government, the UK may have deliberately chosen a different path from the EU, one more friendly to US tech giants.
