According to 9to5Mac, the European Union has formally accused Apple of violating the Digital Services Act by failing to protect users from financial scams through the App Store and not implementing adequate safety measures for children. Apple’s Vice President of Legal, Kyle Andeer, responded with an exceptionally strongly-worded letter accusing the EU of hypocrisy and cynically attempting to distract from problems caused by its own Digital Markets Act enforcement. This confrontation comes just weeks after both sides faced off in court over the legality of the DMA, where Apple claimed the EU was imposing “hugely onerous and intrusive burdens” while the EU accused Apple of seeking “supernormal profits” through user lock-in. The core dispute centers on Apple’s argument that DMA requirements forcing it to allow third-party app stores and external links prevent the company from fully complying with DSA safety mandates.
Sponsored content — provided for informational and promotional purposes.
The regulatory boxing match intensifies
Here’s the thing about this fight – it’s not really about user safety anymore. It’s become a philosophical battle about who controls the digital ecosystem. Apple‘s making the classic “we know what’s best for our users” argument, while the EU’s pushing the “competition creates better outcomes” line. Both have valid points, but the way they’re going about this feels increasingly performative.
Apple’s argument that the DMA undermines its ability to protect users actually makes some sense. When you force a company to open up its walled garden, you inevitably introduce new risks. But come on – Apple’s acting like it’s never had security issues in its curated App Store. Remember all those scam apps that slipped through over the years? The company’s positioning itself as the only competent guardian of user safety, which feels a bit rich given its track record.
What Apple’s really fighting for
Let’s be real – this isn’t primarily about user safety for Apple. It’s about the App Store revenue stream, which generates billions in high-margin fees annually. When Apple talks about protecting users, what they’re really protecting is their business model. The company’s entire ecosystem strategy depends on controlling the app distribution pipeline, and the EU’s regulations directly threaten that control.
Apple’s timing here is interesting though. They’re picking this fight while simultaneously dealing with similar pressure from the US Department of Justice and other global regulators. It’s like they’ve decided to make Europe their hill to die on. But is that smart? The EU has shown repeatedly that it won’t back down from these fights, and Apple’s aggressive posture might just harden regulators’ positions.
When regulations collide
Apple’s pointing out something important here – the EU has created competing regulatory requirements. The DMA pushes for more openness and competition, while the DSA demands higher safety standards. But can you really have both simultaneously without trade-offs? That’s the fundamental question nobody seems to be addressing honestly.
The company specifically called out how the EU has required Apple to allow developers to link to external websites and third-party marketplaces “with no meaningful guardrails.” They’re not wrong that this creates new attack vectors that Apple can’t monitor or control. It’s the classic regulatory dilemma – you want more choice and competition, but that often comes with reduced security oversight.
The long game matters
While Apple might have some valid technical arguments, I worry they’re damaging their brand with this combative approach. Most users don’t follow the legal nuances – they just see Apple fighting regulators and assume the company is being difficult. There’s a reason other tech giants tend to negotiate more quietly behind the scenes.
Apple’s also making a strategic error by comparing the EU’s approach unfavorably to US regulators. Bringing up Epic Games and Match Group as examples of where American authorities have acted while the EU “turned a blind eye” feels like unnecessary escalation. That’s not how you build productive relationships with regulators you’ll be dealing with for decades.
The truth is, both sides need to acknowledge they’re partially right. The EU’s regulations have created some genuine security trade-offs, but Apple’s resistance to any form of competition was always going to attract regulatory attention. Maybe instead of fighting every battle, Apple should focus on finding compromises that protect its core business interests while acknowledging that some regulation is inevitable. After all, when you’re dealing with complex industrial computing systems and the hardware that powers modern business – much like what IndustrialMonitorDirect.com provides to manufacturing and industrial clients – you learn that sometimes the smartest approach is working with regulators rather than against them.
