Skip to content

Bipartisan Open App Markets Act revived to challenge Apple's App Store control

Technology
5 4 39
  • U.S. lawmakers have reintroduced the bipartisan Open App Markets Act, aiming to curb Apple and Google's control over mobile app stores by promoting competition, supporting third-party marketplaces and sideloading, and safeguarding developer rights. AppleInsider reports:

    The Open App Markets Act seeks to do a number of things, including:

    • Protect developers' rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing;
    • Protect sideloading of apps;
    • Promote competition by opening the market to third-party app stores, startup apps, and alternative payment systems;
    • Make it possible for developers to offer new experiences that take advantage of consumer device features;
    • Give consumers greater control over their devices;
    • Prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers; and
    • Establish safeguards to preserve consumer privacy, security, and safety.

    This isn't the first time we've seen this bill, either. In 2021, Senators Blumenthal, Klobuchar, and Blackburn had attempted to put forth the original version of the Open App Markets Act.However, the initial bill never made it to the floor for an office vote. Thanks to last-minute efforts by lobbying groups and appearances from chief executives, the bill eventually stalled out.

    While the two bills are largely similar, the revised version introduces several key differences. Notably, the new version includes new carve-outs aimed at protecting intellectual property and addressing potential national security concerns.There's also a new clause that would prohibit punitive actions against developers for enabling remote access to other apps. The clause addition harkens back to the debacle between Apple and most game streaming services -- though in 2024, Apple loosened its App Store guidelines to allow cloud gaming and emulation.

    There are a few new platform-protective clauses added, too. For instance, it would significantly lower the burden of proof for either Apple or Google to block platform access to a third-party app.Additionally, it reinforces the fact that companies like Apple or Google will not need to provide support or refunds for third-party apps installed outside of first-party app marketplaces.

    The full bill can be found here.

  • U.S. lawmakers have reintroduced the bipartisan Open App Markets Act, aiming to curb Apple and Google's control over mobile app stores by promoting competition, supporting third-party marketplaces and sideloading, and safeguarding developer rights. AppleInsider reports:

    The Open App Markets Act seeks to do a number of things, including:

    • Protect developers' rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing;
    • Protect sideloading of apps;
    • Promote competition by opening the market to third-party app stores, startup apps, and alternative payment systems;
    • Make it possible for developers to offer new experiences that take advantage of consumer device features;
    • Give consumers greater control over their devices;
    • Prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers; and
    • Establish safeguards to preserve consumer privacy, security, and safety.

    This isn't the first time we've seen this bill, either. In 2021, Senators Blumenthal, Klobuchar, and Blackburn had attempted to put forth the original version of the Open App Markets Act.However, the initial bill never made it to the floor for an office vote. Thanks to last-minute efforts by lobbying groups and appearances from chief executives, the bill eventually stalled out.

    While the two bills are largely similar, the revised version introduces several key differences. Notably, the new version includes new carve-outs aimed at protecting intellectual property and addressing potential national security concerns.There's also a new clause that would prohibit punitive actions against developers for enabling remote access to other apps. The clause addition harkens back to the debacle between Apple and most game streaming services -- though in 2024, Apple loosened its App Store guidelines to allow cloud gaming and emulation.

    There are a few new platform-protective clauses added, too. For instance, it would significantly lower the burden of proof for either Apple or Google to block platform access to a third-party app.Additionally, it reinforces the fact that companies like Apple or Google will not need to provide support or refunds for third-party apps installed outside of first-party app marketplaces.

    The full bill can be found here.

    It's rare when I agree with Marsha Blackburn on anything, but broken clocks and all that.

  • U.S. lawmakers have reintroduced the bipartisan Open App Markets Act, aiming to curb Apple and Google's control over mobile app stores by promoting competition, supporting third-party marketplaces and sideloading, and safeguarding developer rights. AppleInsider reports:

    The Open App Markets Act seeks to do a number of things, including:

    • Protect developers' rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing;
    • Protect sideloading of apps;
    • Promote competition by opening the market to third-party app stores, startup apps, and alternative payment systems;
    • Make it possible for developers to offer new experiences that take advantage of consumer device features;
    • Give consumers greater control over their devices;
    • Prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers; and
    • Establish safeguards to preserve consumer privacy, security, and safety.

    This isn't the first time we've seen this bill, either. In 2021, Senators Blumenthal, Klobuchar, and Blackburn had attempted to put forth the original version of the Open App Markets Act.However, the initial bill never made it to the floor for an office vote. Thanks to last-minute efforts by lobbying groups and appearances from chief executives, the bill eventually stalled out.

    While the two bills are largely similar, the revised version introduces several key differences. Notably, the new version includes new carve-outs aimed at protecting intellectual property and addressing potential national security concerns.There's also a new clause that would prohibit punitive actions against developers for enabling remote access to other apps. The clause addition harkens back to the debacle between Apple and most game streaming services -- though in 2024, Apple loosened its App Store guidelines to allow cloud gaming and emulation.

    There are a few new platform-protective clauses added, too. For instance, it would significantly lower the burden of proof for either Apple or Google to block platform access to a third-party app.Additionally, it reinforces the fact that companies like Apple or Google will not need to provide support or refunds for third-party apps installed outside of first-party app marketplaces.

    The full bill can be found here.

    deleted by creator

  • U.S. lawmakers have reintroduced the bipartisan Open App Markets Act, aiming to curb Apple and Google's control over mobile app stores by promoting competition, supporting third-party marketplaces and sideloading, and safeguarding developer rights. AppleInsider reports:

    The Open App Markets Act seeks to do a number of things, including:

    • Protect developers' rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing;
    • Protect sideloading of apps;
    • Promote competition by opening the market to third-party app stores, startup apps, and alternative payment systems;
    • Make it possible for developers to offer new experiences that take advantage of consumer device features;
    • Give consumers greater control over their devices;
    • Prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers; and
    • Establish safeguards to preserve consumer privacy, security, and safety.

    This isn't the first time we've seen this bill, either. In 2021, Senators Blumenthal, Klobuchar, and Blackburn had attempted to put forth the original version of the Open App Markets Act.However, the initial bill never made it to the floor for an office vote. Thanks to last-minute efforts by lobbying groups and appearances from chief executives, the bill eventually stalled out.

    While the two bills are largely similar, the revised version introduces several key differences. Notably, the new version includes new carve-outs aimed at protecting intellectual property and addressing potential national security concerns.There's also a new clause that would prohibit punitive actions against developers for enabling remote access to other apps. The clause addition harkens back to the debacle between Apple and most game streaming services -- though in 2024, Apple loosened its App Store guidelines to allow cloud gaming and emulation.

    There are a few new platform-protective clauses added, too. For instance, it would significantly lower the burden of proof for either Apple or Google to block platform access to a third-party app.Additionally, it reinforces the fact that companies like Apple or Google will not need to provide support or refunds for third-party apps installed outside of first-party app marketplaces.

    The full bill can be found here.

    Apple being sued by shareholders and now this, I wonder if this could cause their CEO to resign.

  • deleted by creator

    What if everyone started talking about how “woke” Apple, Amazon, and Google are? Maybe it would pass, then. Remember, we don’t need to define woke, we just need to point and say the magic word and GOP politicians will vote against it.

  • 75 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    65 Aufrufe
    realitista@lemmy.worldR
    But fascist really fails to capture the ethnic cleansing part. We really do need a new group name to discuss the Israelis who commit ethnic cleansing. Someday I hope we will use it to round up these fuckers for their trials in The Hague. I guess we should call them Likuds or just Zionists.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 28 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    H
    Looks like it hasn't exactly been actively developed since 2022: https://github.com/BoostIO/BoostNote-App/commits/master/
  • France considers requiring Musk’s X to verify users’ age

    Technology technology
    20
    1
    142 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    102 Aufrufe
    C
    TBH, age verification services exist. If it becomes law, integrating them shouldn't be more difficult than integrating a OIDC login. So everyone should be able to do it. Depending on these services, you might not even need to give a name, or, because they are separate entities, don't give your name to the platform using them. Other parts of regulation are more difficult. Like these "upload filters" that need to figure out if something shared via a service is violating any copyright before it is made available.
  • 100 Stimmen
    49 Beiträge
    229 Aufrufe
    A
    Okay man.
  • Why Japan's animation industry has embraced AI

    Technology technology
    12
    1
    1 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    65 Aufrufe
    R
    The genre itself has become neutered, too. A lot of anime series have the usual "anime elements" and a couple custom ideas. And similar style, too glossy for my taste. OK, what I think is old and boring libertarian stuff, I'll still spell it out. The reason people are having such problems is because groups and businesses are de facto legally enshrined in their fields, it's almost like feudal Europe's system of privileges and treaties. At some point I thought this is good, I hope no evil god decided to fulfill my wish. There's no movement, and a faction (like Disney with Star Wars) that buys a place (a brand) can make any garbage, and people will still try to find the depth in it and justify it (that complaint has been made about Star Wars prequels, but no, they are full of garbage AND have consistent arcs, goals and ideas, which is why they revitalized the Expanded Universe for almost a decade, despite Lucas-<companies> having sort of an internal social collapse in year 2005 right after Revenge of the Sith being premiered ; I love the prequels, despite all the pretense and cringe, but their verbal parts are almost fillers, their cinematographic language and matching music are flawless, the dialogue just disrupts it all while not adding much, - I think Lucas should have been more decisive, a bit like Tartakovsky with the Clone Wars cartoon, just more serious, because non-verbal doesn't equal stupid). OK, my thought wandered away. Why were the legal means they use to keep such positions created? To make the economy nicer to the majority, to writers, to actors, to producers. Do they still fulfill that role? When keeping monopolies, even producing garbage or, lately, AI slop, - no. Do we know a solution? Not yet, because pressing for deregulation means the opponent doing a judo movement and using that energy for deregulating the way everything becomes worse. Is that solution in minimizing and rebuilding the system? I believe still yes, nothing is perfect, so everything should be easy to quickly replace, because errors and mistakes plaguing future generations will inevitably continue to be made. The laws of the 60s were simple enough for that in most countries. The current laws are not. So the general direction to be taken is still libertarian. Is this text useful? Of course not. I just think that in the feudal Europe metaphor I'd want to be a Hussite or a Cossack or at worst a Venetian trader.
  • U.S.-Sanctioned Terrorists Enjoy Premium Boost on X

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    90 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    M
    Yeah but considering who's in charge of the government, half of us will be hit with that designation sooner or later.
  • If you value privacy, ditch Chrome and switch to Firefox now

    Technology technology
    3
    1 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    B
    Why did firefox kill pwa support on desktop?