{"id":58937,"date":"2025-09-25T18:39:38","date_gmt":"2025-09-25T16:39:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.apfelpatient.de\/?p=58937"},"modified":"2025-09-25T18:42:53","modified_gmt":"2025-09-25T16:42:53","slug":"apple-warns-of-dma-when-regulation-becomes-a-risk","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.apfelpatient.de\/en\/news\/apple-warnt-vor-dma-wenn-regulierung-zum-risiko-wird","title":{"rendered":"Apple warns of DMA: When regulation becomes a risk"},"content":{"rendered":"

The dispute between Apple and the European Union surrounding the Digital Markets Act (DMA) is increasingly demonstrating that Brussels isn't interested in a genuine debate. Instead of engaging with Apple's proposals, the EU is stonewalling and relying on penalties. Apple stands alone in its criticism\u2014and this reveals precisely how one-sided the implementation of the law has been so far.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The DMA is supposed to ensure fair competition. In practice, it forces Apple to open up interfaces and user data to competitors, even if this endangers users' privacy. While other companies benefit or remain silent, Apple is the only one to openly address the law's weaknesses. The EU's ignoring of these concerns raises questions \u2013 not only about the fairness of the law, but also about the Commission's intentions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The premature reaction from Brussels<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Apple submitted its comments on the DMA as requested. However, instead of thoroughly reviewing all comments and waiting until 2026 to draw a conclusion, the EU reacted immediately and unusually harshly. Spokesperson Thomas Regnier accused<\/a> Apple of challenging every rule since the law came into force. Brussels considers this a blocking stance, but it actually only demonstrates that Apple takes its responsibility seriously and does not simply accept risks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Contradictory statements from the EU<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Apple reports that the Commission even blocked its own proposals that would have solved implementation problems. Brussels subsequently imposed penalties precisely for this non-compliance. Officially, it sounds as if Apple was sanctioned for the solution it chose, not for alternative ideas. But this contradiction actually confirms Apple's accusation: The EU doesn't want real solutions, but simply obedience. Apple also made an appearance at a workshop in June 2025, albeit with noticeable reluctance. But instead of acknowledging the dialogue, Regnier made it clear that Brussels alone would decide how the law would be enforced. He even mentioned further open cases against Apple \u2013 which sounds more like a threat than cooperation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Apple as the only company with backbone<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

The DMA affects six major tech companies, but only Apple is resisting. Google, Meta, and other companies remain silent because they have benefited or been able to adapt their business models. Spotify, which itself is not considered a gatekeeper, is even gaining influence. Apple, on the other hand, is being accused of disclosing technologies and user data that competitors like Meta could use to circumvent protection mechanisms. The DMA thus endangers not only European but also international customers. Apple's refusal to accept this point is less stubbornness than a necessary protection of security and privacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The real weakness of the DMA<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Officially, the DMA is about competition. In reality, the EU is enforcing rules that weaken companies instead of promoting innovation. Apple is particularly hard hit because data protection and security have been a core commitment to the company for years. Sacrificing these core values simply to grant competitors access doesn't create fair competition\u2014it creates a risk for all users.<\/p>\n\n\n\n