An inquiry group setup by the U.K.’s antitrust authority has provisionally found that Apple’s policies are “holding back innovation in the browsers we use to access the web on mobile phones.”
While the report focuses substantively on Apple, it also highlighted a revenue-sharing agreement with Google, noting that the duo “earn significant revenue” when Google Chrome is used on iOS, which reduces their “financial incentives to compete.”
The announcement comes in the same week as the Department of Justice (DoJ) in the U.S. said that Google should divest its Chrome browser, after a judge ruled in August that the internet giant was tantamount to an illegal monopoly on online search.
Today’s findings have been a long-time in the making. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) launched a market study back in 2021, looking into Apple and Google’s dominance in mobile, including practices and policies around their respective app stores and browsers. The following year, the CMA confirmed it was launching a formal antitrust probe into this Android-iOS “mobile duopoly,” focused on browsers and cloud gaming, noting at the time that it had concerns that they could be restricting competition and harming consumers.
Today, the CMA said it wouldn’t be moving forward with the cloud gaming aspect of its probe, due to changes Apple has already made which “look to have positive implications for competition in this market,” the report noted.
However, many of the other complaints remain. The CMA said that Apple forces competing mobile browsers in the U.K. to use Apple’s browser engine, Webkit, which limits what these browsers are able to do and curbs their ability to differentiate. Moreover, browsers that do use WebKit haven’t been given the same level of access and functionality as Apple’s own Safari has, which “has a negative impact on competition and innovation.” This also includes limitations on how third-party apps can leverage so-called “in-app browsing,” meaning access to the open web from within native iOS apps.
“We have provisionally found that Apple’s restrictions limit the traffic available to challenger browsers in this type of browsing and also limit the extent to which apps can customise their users’ browsing experience, as companies with millions of users like Meta would like to do,” the report notes. “We have provisionally found that this limits competition and choice in terms of the options available to app developers to offer in-app browsing.”
An Apple spokesperson said that it disagrees with the findings, and any changes could ultimately “undermine user privacy and security.” The spokesperson said:
“Apple believes in thriving and dynamic markets where innovation can flourish. We face competition in every segment and jurisdiction where we operate, and our focus is always the trust of our users. We disagree with the findings in the report regarding Safari, WebKit, and in-app browsing on iOS. We are concerned that the interventions discussed in the report for future consideration under the Digital Markets, Competition, and Consumers Act would undermine user privacy and security and hinder our ability to make the kind of technology that sets Apple apart. We will continue to engage constructively with the CMA as their work on this matter progresses.”
This is a common refrain Apple has used in other similar complaints it has faced, including the expansive lawsuit launched by the Department of Justice (DoJ) in the U.S. earlier this year, which accused Apple of constructing its privacy and security practices to benefit the company financially.
A Google spokesperson said that “Android’s openness has helped to expand choice, reduce prices and democratize access to smartphones and apps,” adding that it will “continue to engage constructively with the CMA on these matters in the months ahead.”
The long and short of all this is that nothing will actually change for now. But the inquiry notes that the U.K.’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act, rules that are set to come into force next year, should be used by CMA to address these practices.
For now, the CMA said that it’s inviting further comments on its provisional findings, and it expects to make a final decision by March, 2025.