Apple vs. Federal Cartel Office: Is ATT a competition problem? Apfelpatient

Apple is once again under fire in Germany. An antitrust complaint has been pending against the company for three years because of App Tracking Transparency (ATT). This function allows iPhone users to prevent tracking by third-party apps. However, the Federal Cartel Office has made serious allegations: Apple is said not to apply ATT to its own apps and thereby gain an advantage over other providers. The authority has now published a preliminary legal assessment and considers a possible violation of competition law. Apple now has the opportunity to comment.

Since the introduction of App Tracking Transparency in 2021, Apple has been promoting more data protection for its users. Anyone who uses an app on an iPhone or iPad can use a pop-up to decide whether the app can track him or her across different applications. But what is sold as a protective measure could also be a competitive advantage for Apple itself. While third-party apps have to follow strict rules, Apple is said to apply more generous data protection regulations to its own apps. This could mean that Apple is building a monopoly in the area of personalized advertising on iOS devices while competitors are disadvantaged. The Federal Cartel Office sees sees this as a possible abuse of market power and has delved into the investigation. The authority's preliminary assessment could have long-term consequences for Apple and the entire digital advertising market.

App Tracking Transparency: What's Behind It?

Apple introduced the App Tracking Transparency Framework (ATTF) in April 2021. Since then, apps have no longer been allowed to collect data for advertising purposes without the express consent of users. This particularly affects third-party apps such as Facebook, Google or other advertising networks that previously had access to extensive user data. This regulation means that many companies have had to adapt their advertising models. Platforms such as Facebook initially lost a large part of their personalized advertising options, but were able to develop alternative solutions through new technologies and the increased use of artificial intelligence. However, there is one crucial exception: Apple itself does not seem to adhere to these rules to the same extent. This is exactly what the Federal Cartel Office is now investigating.

allegations of the Federal Cartel Office

The Federal Cartel Office has now given Apple a preliminary legal assessment transmitted. There are several central points of criticism in focus:

Unequal data protection standards: Third-party providers must obtain explicit consent from users, but Apple is said to treat its own apps and services differently.
Market distortion: Apple could use ATT as a means to weaken competitors in the digital advertising space while growing its own advertising business.
Possible violation of competition law: The authority relies on Section 19a Paragraph 2 of the Act against Restraints of Competition (GWB) and on Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which prohibit abuse of a dominant market position.

According to the Federal Cartel Office, Apple could use its market power to specifically influence competition in the digital advertising business.

Possible consequences for Apple

Apple now has the opportunity to respond to the allegations. If the authority comes to the conclusion that ATT does indeed violate competition law, drastic measures could follow. Possible measures include:

Adjusting the ATT guidelines so that Apple subjects its own apps to the same privacy rules as third-party apps.
Penalties or requirements to ensure that Apple does not have an unfair advantage over other advertisers.
A possible signal effect for other markets, as there are also discussions in the EU and the USA about Apple's data protection and advertising practices.

If Apple is forced to revise ATT, it could have significant implications for the entire advertising industry.

How does the advertising market react?

Interestingly, large advertising providers such as Meta (Facebook) have already found ways to deal with ATT. Instead of relying on cross-device tracking, Facebook is relying more on artificial intelligence and machine learning to target users. This means that ATT has not destroyed the personalized advertising business, but has only changed it. For advertisers, this means a realignment of their strategies, as classic tracking methods no longer work reliably.

Is Apple facing a legal battle?

The next steps are now up to Apple. The company can comment on the allegations and possibly make adjustments to ATT. If the Federal Cartel Office comes to the conclusion that Apple is abusing its market power, a legal dispute could follow. The decision will not only affect Apple but will influence the entire digital advertising market. If Apple is forced to change its data protection guidelines, this could have far-reaching consequences for the entire app ecosystem on iOS devices. For users, this does not mean any direct change for the time being. You can still decide which apps can track you and which cannot. However, the advertising landscape on iPhones and iPads could change significantly again in the long term. It remains to be seen how Apple reacts to the pressure from the Federal Cartel Office and whether there will be a fundamental change in app tracking transparency. (Photo by Unsplash / Paolo Giubilato)