Apple and Google take a very dim view of two bills that could threaten their business model. The two American giants highlight consumer safety to justify their position.
The pressure is increasing on the Gafa in the United States. And after Facebook, which will not escape a trial after a complaint deemed admissible by the American competition policeman, Apple and Google are stepping up to defend themselves. The two American giants have a very dim view of two bills that could threaten their economic model. And for good reason, the American Innovation and Choice Online Act aims to prevent big tech companies from favoring their services over other companies, while the Open App Markets Act aims to promote competition on app stores. online apps.
Inevitably, Apple, which takes a commission of 15 to 30% on each transaction carried out within its in-app payment system for all applications downloaded from its App Store, saw red. And Apple’s senior director of government affairs, Tim Powderly, hasn’t been shy about letting it be known. He thus wrote a vitriolic letter, consulted by Bloomberg, to several American parliamentarians to make known the opinion of the apple brand on the two antitrust texts studied on Capitol Hill. The representative of the Cupertino company attacks in particular the Open App Markets Act which would authorize sideloading, a practice which consists in downloading an application from a third source, that is outside the sacrosanct App Store.
In the eyes of Tim Powderly, this would be detrimental to the security of the App Store, since applications outside its ecosystem are not subject to the same security standards that applications must meet to earn the right to appear on the App. Store. “After a tumultuous year that was marked by multiple controversies over social media, whistleblower allegations of long-ignored risks to children, and ransomware attacks that hampered critical infrastructure, it would be ironic that Congress is responding by making it much more difficult to protect the privacy and security of Americans’ personal devices”, writes Tim Powderly. And to add:“Unfortunately, that’s what these bills would do.”
“Breaking our products would not solve any of these problems”
On the side of Google, the argument is even bolder. The American giant believes that the two antitrust bills could prevent it from offering the “best” consumer services. And for good reason, the Californian firm would no longer be able to systematically highlight the services of its ecosystem, which would lead consumers to be influenced by other applications which, according to Google, are not as good as its own. . “Americans could have degraded, less relevant and less useful versions of products like Google Search and Maps”, wrote Kent Walker, Google’s chief legal officer, in a blog post. We will appreciate the modesty of the Mountain View firm…
The latter does not stop there, claiming that such antitrust legislation could prevent it from integrating default security features into its applications, such as its Safe Browsing service and spam filters in Gmail and Chrome, which block pop-ups, viruses and malware. “We believe that updating technology regulations in areas such as privacy, artificial intelligence and child and family protection could bring real benefits. But breaking our products would not solve any of these problems. Instead doing so would eliminate useful features, expose people to new privacy and security risks, and weaken America’s technology leadership.”, said Kent Walker again.
Like Apple, Google is keen to protect its closed ecosystem, and the two American giants hope to defeat the adoption of antitrust texts in the American Congress. In this sense, the Gafam do not hesitate to put millions of dollars to influence the decisions of American parliamentarians. In 2020, Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft spent $61.1 million on lobbying (-1.8% compared to 2019), including almost $20 million just for Facebook.