Recently, Apple allies have published false and misleading claims about the bipartisan App Store Freedom Act (ASFA), co-sponsored by Reps. Kat Cammack and Lori Trahan. ASFA will give consumers more choice in mobile apps, lower prices, and unlock innovation stifled by Apple and Google’s app store monopolies. In fact, ASFA is built entirely on the capitalistic ideals of competition and an open marketplace.
Claim: ASFA allows “free riding” on Apple and Google
Reality: Apple and Google stifle innovation with their infamous 30% app store tax, which federal courts have found “unjustified,” “extraordinarily high,” unrelated to the companies’ operating costs, and enabled by a lack of competition. A bipartisan House Antitrust Committee report found that this anti-competitive behavior harms developers and consumers through reduced quality, higher prices, and limited choice. Apple has even abused its position by copying innovations from rejected apps. In fact, the U.S. Department of Justice, joined by 16 states, is suing Apple for suppressing competing services. ASFA simply corrects for this illegal conduct, preventing monopoly rents and giving consumers options for app access.
Claim: Apple and Google’s dominance is merit-based; ASFA allows “unvetted” apps.
Reality: While Apple and Google created innovative products, courts have validated that their dominance is maintained through illegal, anti-competitive conduct. Developers initially made app stores successful, but Apple and Google then abused their position. ASFA doesn’t force anyone to download apps outside the Google Play and Apple App Stores. It offers consumers choice and flexibility, similar to how they download apps on computers. Furthermore, Apple and Google have a poor track record of preventing harmful apps, profiting from scams, and failing to protect children—as evidenced by admissions from Apple engineers and detailed in recent FTC complaints. Relying on these two companies, who consistently fail to meet their own standards, is irresponsible. ASFA would allow alternative and safer app stores.
Claim: ASFA forces a “free-for-all” leading to scams, fraud, and hacking.
Reality: This claim projects Apple and Google’s own failures. ASFA simply gives consumers options. The bill enables others to build secure ecosystems that compete on safety. Cybersecurity expert Bruce Schneier has debunked claims that ASFA weakens privacy or security. Existing device security features remain, and consumers could have options to use safer app stores.
Claim: App stores are akin to Costco.
Reality: The argument that Apple and Google are simply “curating” their app stores like Costco carefully selects products for its shelves is a misleading defense. A more accurate analogy would be if Costco not only dictated what could be sold, but also prohibited suppliers from mentioning lower prices elsewhere, prevented any other stores from operating, and banned all alternative ways for consumers to buy goods. For Costco, such absolute control would be ludicrous and undeniably illegal anti-competitive conduct. The main difference here, though, is consumers still have the choice to drive to another store or order it online, whereas Apple and Google are unapologetically exhibiting this behavior and consumers have nowhere else to go in the app market.
Overall, these claims echo tired monopolist arguments. The facts show ASFA would benefit consumers and developers—and help grow the app economy—through increased competition.
###
The Coalition for App Fairness is an independent nonprofit organization formed to protect consumer choice, foster competition, and create a level playing field for all app and game developers globally. Originally formed by Basecamp, Blix, Blockchain.com, Deezer, Epic Games, the European Publishers Council, Match Group, News Media Europe, Prepear, Proton, Skydemon, Spotify, and Life360, CAF has rapidly grown from 13 to 80 members since launching in September 2020. CAF offers membership to companies of any size — join today at appfairness.org.