US Senate to vote on stopping Big Tech extracting 'monopolist rent' from app developers

Billions in profits at stake for Apple and Google's money-making machines


The US Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday voted to pass the Open App Markets Act, despite intense lobbying from Apple and Google.

The bill, S.2710 [PDF], limits the kinds of restrictions major app platforms can impose on competitors, developers, and customers, will now be considered by a full Senate vote.

If approved, along with its companion bill H.R. 5017 [PDF] introduced in the House of Representatives last year, and then signed by President Biden, the legislation will remake an app economy that generates well over $100bn annually.

During the committee hearing in Washington DC, Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), the bill's sponsor, likened Apple and Google to past US railroad monopolies.

"There's been a groundswell of enthusiasm and support for this bill because the American public recognizes that the mobile market is broken," he said.

"Today the simple stark fact is that Google and Apple own the rails. They own the rails of the app economy much as the railroad companies did at the start of the last century."

He described how a Microsoft executive once reportedly said the company wanted to use its dominance over the personal computing market to collect a "vig" – a payment – for every transaction on the internet that used Redmond's technology.

Microsoft, he said, was never successful in doing that, in part thanks to US antitrust enforcement. But now after decades of lax enforcement, "Apple and Google now have managed to do what Microsoft couldn't at the peak of its monopoly powers," he said. "They collect a vig on nearly every transaction in our app economy."

Citing House Judiciary Committee investigative data, Blumenthal said that Apple makes $15bn in profit from its App Store at a cost of less than $100m.

"Apple makes 150 times in profit what it takes to run the App Store," he said. "That is what we call monopolist rent."

A rare display of bipartisanship

"The passage of the Open App Markets Act out of the Senate Judiciary committee brings us one step closer to having this legislation signed into law," said Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), one of the bill's co-sponsors, via Twitter. "This bill will let people download apps directly from outside companies rather than being forced to go through official app stores."

The proposed legislation will do more than that. It prevents large app platforms with at least 50 million users in the US – namely Apple's iOS App Store and Google Play – from requiring that other companies and individual developers use their respective in-app payment systems.

It requires support for installing third-party apps and app stores from a source other than the platform App Store (which could be interpreted as third-party stores rather than individually authorized "sideloading"), for making third-party apps act in place of default apps, and for hiding or deleting pre-installed default apps.

Apple for months has been warning about the calamity of allowing sideloading – despite the fact that it supports sideloading on macOS – and both companies sent last minute letters to lawmakers hoping to stave off a future that now looks rather likely.

The Chamber of Progress, a technology trade group headed by a former Google lobbyist and supported by Amazon, Facebook, and Google, among others, also expressed concern about the advancement of the bill.

"By mandating sideloading, this bill would guarantee iPhone access to the worst apps out there – both security threats and hate speech services," said Chamber of Progress CEO Adam Kovacevich in a statement. "It poses a serious threat to content moderation – eliminating Apple’s ability to stop the spread of apps that promote misinformation and hate speech."

The Coalition for App Fairness, a group representing app developers, applauded the legislative markup and urged the full approval of the bill by both the Senate and House. "This bipartisan, bicameral legislation will hold gatekeeper platforms accountable, increase fair competition, and benefit consumers across the nation with greater choice and innovation," said executive director Meghan DiMuzio in a statement.

Kosta Eleftheriou, an app developer who has been critical of Apple's practices, disputed Kovacevich's claim that Apple would be unable to remove fraudulent or malicious apps under the requirements of the bill. Eleftheriou observed that Apple has access to security controls on its mobile devices that are separate from its platform rules.

"Apple can both do malware screening for apps, as well as disable apps after they’ve been distributed via a 'kill switch,'' he told The Register.

"This is how notarized (non-App Store) apps work on macOS today, and exactly how they could work on iOS too. The security and privacy protections that people often bring up are all enforced on the device itself."

"Another way to think about this is that Apple already does all this malware screening for App Store apps as part of its App Review process, and that part isn’t done by humans," Eleftheriou explained.

"Humans can’t tell if there's malware or a virus inside an app. So Apple could simply supply this non-human part as a malware scanning service, the same exact way they have been offering on macOS for years now."

Yes, about that Apple - Schneier's peeved

Cryptographer and security expert Bruce Schneier argues Apple's security worries are disingenuous. In a letter sent to Senate Judiciary Committee members about the Open App Markets Act and the S. 2992, the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (which limits platform self-preferencing).

"I would like to address some of the unfounded security concerns raised about these bills," he wrote. "It’s simply not true that this legislation puts user privacy and security at risk. In fact, it’s fairer to say that this legislation puts those companies’ extractive business-models at risk. Their claims about risks to privacy and security are both false and disingenuous, and motivated by their own self-interest and not the public interest."

The bills don't prevent platforms from implementing security and privacy measures, Schneier says, a point also made in a Consumer Reports letter sent in support of S.2710 to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Schneier also points out that the language of the statute does not require "sideloading" in the strictest definition of the term – the ability to install arbitrary apps without an intermediary. Rather it requires platforms to provide a way to "install third-party Apps or App Stores through means other than its App Store."

"This interoperability does not require one-click installation of random apps from the Internet, only that companies relinquish their monopoly control over app stores," explained Schneier. "Alternative stores could have the same, or even more, security restrictions than Apple."

He also addresses Apple's claim that it is defending user choice, saying the company's argument is exactly backwards.

"Our devices are our own, and interoperability will allow us to use them as we choose," Schneier wrote in his letter. "Any user who prefers to use only Apple-approved applications will have no trouble doing so. But S.2710 will finally give users the freedom to leave the walled garden: to build, share, and install software that hasn’t been approved by Apple’s moderation machine." ®


Other stories you might like

  • Despite 'key' partnership with AWS, Meta taps up Microsoft Azure for AI work
    Someone got Zuck'd

    Meta’s AI business unit set up shop in Microsoft Azure this week and announced a strategic partnership it says will advance PyTorch development on the public cloud.

    The deal [PDF] will see Mark Zuckerberg’s umbrella company deploy machine-learning workloads on thousands of Nvidia GPUs running in Azure. While a win for Microsoft, the partnership calls in to question just how strong Meta’s commitment to Amazon Web Services (AWS) really is.

    Back in those long-gone days of December, Meta named AWS as its “key long-term strategic cloud provider." As part of that, Meta promised that if it bought any companies that used AWS, it would continue to support their use of Amazon's cloud, rather than force them off into its own private datacenters. The pact also included a vow to expand Meta’s consumption of Amazon’s cloud-based compute, storage, database, and security services.

    Continue reading
  • Atos pushes out HPC cloud services based on Nimbix tech
    Moore's Law got you down? Throw everything at the problem! Quantum, AI, cloud...

    IT services biz Atos has introduced a suite of cloud-based high-performance computing (HPC) services, based around technology gained from its purchase of cloud provider Nimbix last year.

    The Nimbix Supercomputing Suite is described by Atos as a set of flexible and secure HPC solutions available as a service. It includes access to HPC, AI, and quantum computing resources, according to the services company.

    In addition to the existing Nimbix HPC products, the updated portfolio includes a new federated supercomputing-as-a-service platform and a dedicated bare-metal service based on Atos BullSequana supercomputer hardware.

    Continue reading
  • In record year for vulnerabilities, Microsoft actually had fewer
    Occasional gaping hole and overprivileged users still blight the Beast of Redmond

    Despite a record number of publicly disclosed security flaws in 2021, Microsoft managed to improve its stats, according to research from BeyondTrust.

    Figures from the National Vulnerability Database (NVD) of the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) show last year broke all records for security vulnerabilities. By December, according to pentester Redscan, 18,439 were recorded. That's an average of more than 50 flaws a day.

    However just 1,212 vulnerabilities were reported in Microsoft products last year, said BeyondTrust, a 5 percent drop on the previous year. In addition, critical vulnerabilities in the software (those with a CVSS score of 9 or more) plunged 47 percent, with the drop in Windows Server specifically down 50 percent. There was bad news for Internet Explorer and Edge vulnerabilities, though: they were up 280 percent on the prior year, with 349 flaws spotted in 2021.

    Continue reading
  • ServiceNow takes aim at procurement pain points
    Purchasing teams are a bit like help desks – always being asked to answer dumb or inappropriate questions

    ServiceNow's efforts to expand into more industries will soon include a Procurement Service Management product.

    This is not a dedicated application – ServiceNow has occasionally flirted with templates for its platform that come very close to being apps. Instead it stays close to the company's core of providing workflows that put the right jobs in the right hands, and make sure they get done. In this case, it will do so by tickling ERP and dedicated procurement applications, using tech ServiceNow acquired along with a company called Gekkobrain in 2021.

    The company believes it can play to its strengths with procurements via a single, centralized buying team.

    Continue reading
  • HPE, Cerebras build AI supercomputer for scientific research
    Wafer madness hits the LRZ in HPE Superdome supercomputer wrapper

    HPE and Cerebras Systems have built a new AI supercomputer in Munich, Germany, pairing a HPE Superdome Flex with the AI accelerator technology from Cerebras for use by the scientific and engineering community.

    The new system, created for the Leibniz Supercomputing Center (LRZ) in Munich, is being deployed to meet the current and expected future compute needs of researchers, including larger deep learning neural network models and the emergence of multi-modal problems that involve multiple data types such as images and speech, according to Laura Schulz, LRZ's head of Strategic Developments and Partnerships.

    "We're seeing an increase in large data volumes coming at us that need more and more processing, and models that are taking months to train, we want to be able to speed that up," Schulz said.

    Continue reading
  • We have bigger targets than beating Oracle, say open source DB pioneers
    Advocates for MySQL and PostgreSQL see broader future for movement they helped create

    MySQL pioneer Peter Zaitsev, an early employee of MySQL AB under the original open source database author Michael "Monty" Widenius, once found it easy to identify the enemy.

    "In the early days of MySQL AB, we were there to get Oracle's ass. Our CEO Mårten Mickos was always telling us how we were going to get out there and replace all those Oracle database installations," Zaitsev told The Register.

    Speaking at Percona Live, the open source database event hosted by the services company Zaitsev founded in 2006 and runs as chief exec, he said that situation had changed since Oracle ended up owning MySQL in 2010. This was as a consequence of its acquisition that year of Sun Microsystems, which had bought MySQL AB just two years earlier.

    Continue reading
  • Beijing needs the ability to 'destroy' Starlink, say Chinese researchers
    Paper authors warn Elon Musk's 2,400 machines could be used offensively

    An egghead at the Beijing Institute of Tracking and Telecommunications, writing in a peer-reviewed domestic journal, has advocated for Chinese military capability to take out Starlink satellites on the grounds of national security.

    According to the South China Morning Post, lead author Ren Yuanzhen and colleagues advocated in Modern Defence Technology not only for China to develop anti-satellite capabilities, but also to have a surveillance system that could monitor and track all satellites in Starlink's constellation.

    "A combination of soft and hard kill methods should be adopted to make some Starlink satellites lose their functions and destroy the constellation's operating system," the Chinese boffins reportedly said, estimating that data transmission speeds of stealth fighter jets and US military drones could increase by a factor of 100 through a Musk machine connection.

    Continue reading
  • How to explain what an API is – and why they matter
    Some of us have used them for decades, some are seeing them for the first time on marketing slides

    Systems Approach Explaining what an API is can be surprisingly difficult.

    It's striking to remember that they have been around for about as long as we've had programming languages, and that while the "API economy" might be a relatively recent term, APIs have been enabling innovation for decades. But how to best describe them to someone for whom application programming interfaces mean little or nothing?

    I like this short video from Martin Casado, embedded below, which starts with the analogy of building cars. In the very early days, car manufacturers were vertically integrated businesses, essentially starting from iron ore and coal to make steel all the way through to producing the parts and then the assembled vehicle. As the business matured and grew in size, car manufacturers were able to buy components built by others, and entire companies could be created around supplying just a single component, such as a spring.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022