US Rep. Kat Cammack has introduced the App Store Freedom Act, targeting Apple, Google, and any company that owns both the operating system and the app store that runs on it.

Apple and Google have both been in the news for their tight control over their app ecosystems, with Apple obviously having a much tighter hold than Google. Apple was recently slapped with a major court loss over its failure to abide by an injunction forcing it to allow developers to provide links to third-party payment options.

Rep. Cammack wants to take things a step further with legislation aimed at ensuring companies like Apple and Google give users the option of using the app store of their choice.

“We must continue to hold Big Tech accountable and promote competition that allows all players to enter the field. For too long, consumers and developers have borne the brunt of anti-competitive practices on major app store marketplaces,” said Rep. Cammack. “Dominant app stores have controlled customer data and forced consumers to use the marketplaces’ own merchant services, instead of the native, in-app offerings provided by the applications and developers themselves. The results are higher prices and limited selections for consumers and anti-competitive practices for developers that have stifled innovation.”

“At its core, this bill seeks to promote a competitive marketplace for consumers and developers, ensuring U.S. mobile users can choose the applications, payment methods and platforms that are best for them without unduly forcing developers to comply or the pay the price—both literally and figuratively—for straying from the dominant marketplaces’ preferences,” Rep. Cammack added.

Possible DMA Inspiration

The wording of the bill is strikingly similar to the recent Digital Markets Act (DMA) EU legislation aimed at so-called “gatekeepers.” Under the DMA, large companies that control entire platforms are prohibited from promoting their own services—including app stores—to the exclusion of rivals’.

Rep. Cammack’s bill appears to take inspiration from that approach, based on what it describes.

INTEROPERABILITY.—A covered company that owns or controls the operating system on which an app store owned or controlled by the covered company operates shall allow and provide readily accessible means for a user of such operating system to—

• choose a third-party app or app store as a default;
• install a third-party app or app store install a third-party app or app store install a third-party app or app store
• hide or delete an app or app store provided or pre-installed by the covered company (or any business partner of the covered company).

OPEN APP DEVELOPMENT.—A covered company, in a timely manner, without cost, and on terms that are equivalent to the terms of access by the covered company or any business partner of the covered company, shall provide to a developer of an covered company, shall provide to a developer of an through an app store, owned or controlled by the covered company—

• access to any interface and hardware and software feature of the operating system that are generally available to the covered company and any business partner of the covered company; and
• documentation and development information sufficient to access any such interface and feature.

EXCLUSIVITY AND TYING.—A covered company may not—

• require, as a condition for an app to be accessible on an operating system or distributed through an app store that is owned or controlled by the covered company, that—

• a developer of the app use or en able an in-app payment system owned or controlled by the covered company or any business partner of the covered company; or
• pricing or other terms of sale be equal to or more favorable on such operating system or app store than on another operating system or app store; or
• take punitive action or otherwise impose less favorable terms and conditions against a developer of an app distributed outside of an app store that is owned or controlled by the covered company—
• for using or offering different pricing or other terms of sale on an app store or through an in-app payment system that is not owned or controlled by the covered company; or
• on the basis that such app provides access to a third-party app that is not owned or controlled by the covered company through remote electronic services rather than through download from an operating system or an app store that is owned or controlled by the covered company.

Industry Support

Needless to say, the bill is already garnering support from the usual parties.

“The App Store Freedom Act could be a game-changer for American consumers by giving them more choice and control over their devices than ever before. We applaud Representative Kat Cammack for introducing common-sense rules of the road to permanently open up the app economy, unlock new opportunities for businesses and creators, and encourage even stronger tech innovation in the United States,” said Dustee Jenkins, Spotify Chief Public Affairs Officer.

“CAF applauds Congresswoman Cammack for introducing the App Store Freedom Act, legislation that will establish a fair and competitive mobile app marketplace. This is a vital step towards empowering developers and consumers by ensuring a level playing field for all participants in the app ecosystem,” shared the Coalition for App Fairness (CAF).

Conclusion

Lawmakers and regulators on both sides of the Atlantic are clearly tiring of the status quo, when it comes to gatekeeper companies.

If Rep Cammack’s bill passes, it will fundamentally change how Apple and Google’s mobile ecosystems work. In many ways, that will be a positive for users, giving them more freedom and choice. On the other hand, one of the reasons Apple has been so successful at protecting users from malware is because of its walled garden approach. Taking that wall down will result in more cybersecurity threats for iOS users.