Digital Markets Act aims to allow more competition and let consumers delete preloaded phone apps

Haven’t seen any posts about this and it’s a pretty big thing. From DMA website:

Examples of the “do’s”: gatekeepers will for example have to:

  • allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own services in certain specific situations;
  • provide companies advertising on their platform with the tools and information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of their advertisements hosted by the gatekeeper;
  • allow their business users to promote their offer and conclude contracts with their customers outside the gatekeeper’s platform.

Example of the “don’ts”: gatekeepers will for example no longer:

  • treat services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself more favourably in ranking than similar services or products offered by third parties on the gatekeeper’s platform;
  • prevent users from un-installing any pre-installed software or app if they wish so;
  • track end users outside of the gatekeepers’ core platform service for the purpose of targeted advertising, without effective consent having been granted.

We’ll see how this plays out but this is first move in a very long time that could open up platform like WhatsApp to 3rd party clients and force Google and Apple to open their mobile OSes to other apps. Maybe we’ll see stock Android without play services? One can dream…

P.S. https://digital-markets-act-cases.ec.europa.eu - page about the legislation

  • duxbellorum@lemm.eeEnglish
    37·
    1 year ago

    Spoke to some EU lawyers recently at a policy meetup and this is pretty consistent with their prevailing sensibilities: target and dilute power that is being held over consumers.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    13·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    The package of laws will also pave the way for more competition in some of the areas most guarded by the tech firms, including Apple Wallet and Google Pay.

    The Digital Markets Act (DMA) is the second big package of EU laws to hit tech firms in two months and defines a series of obligations that gatekeepers need to comply with, including not participating in anti-competitive practices.

    The DMA aims to undo the gatekeeper or controlling position that large tech companies have commanded in the last 10 years and gives the European Commission the power to conduct market investigations and design remedies if the firms fall out of line.

    Brussels intends the laws to open the door to more competition, allowing startups to compete with the giants on a level playing field for the first time.

    The tech companies – including Apple, Google and Amazon – have six months to comply with a full list of dos and don’ts under the new laws, after which they could be fined up to 10% of their turnover.

    The laws will initially apply to six companies: Alphabet (which owns Google), Amazon, Apple, ByteDance (the owner of TikTok), Meta (Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp) and Microsoft.

    The original article contains 575 words, the summary contains 201 words. Saved 65%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • yesStehen@feddit.de
    6·
    1 year ago

    Great! Does that mean that we will be able to message people via WhatsApp without needing to have it installed? (Via some kind of api)

    • Gamey@feddit.rocks
      15·
      1 year ago

      Yes, that’s the goal, there was a great blog post from one of the KDE guys about a meeting people from the Neochat, Matrix and XMPP projects where invited to to explain the benefits of interoperability between chat apps and that part actually made it into the law now!

        • Gamey@feddit.rocks
          3·
          1 year ago

          With a focus on “sometimes” but yea, it’s certainly better than most in many cases!

          • HumanPerson@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            6·
            1 year ago

            Yeah their headlines are always great or terrible. “EU requires iPhones to use usb c” “eu is trying to ban encryption” “eu requires devices to have repairable batteries”

  • library_napper@monyet.cc
    3·
    1 year ago

    Big tech companies will be barred from monetising information about phone users, prohibiting them from using the data they collect from apps on a phone to build up a detailed picture of individual consumer behaviours for advertisers.

    Does anyone know if this also applies to banks that monetize from your purchase and transaction history and sell your profile to advertisers?

    Or do banks have the EU by the balls in a way that tech companies don’t?

    • ExLisper@linux.communityOPEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      So much confusion about this… But I understand, it is confusing.

      GDPR was about privacy and does apply to banks. Banks can’t gather or process personal data without consent: https://americandeposits.com/gdpr-affect-bank/

      This new regulation is specifically about Big Tech. It regulates companies that control significant parts of market and block smaller companies from entering it. This has nothing to do with banks.

  • library_napper@monyet.cc
    1·
    1 year ago

    The tech companies – including Apple, Google and Amazon – have six months to comply with a full list of dos and don’ts under the new laws, after which they could be fined up to 10% of their turnover. In Meta’s case, this would be 10% of $120bn (£95bn).

    6 months from what day?

  • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.eeEnglish
    414·
    1 year ago

    Hopefully it works out better then the GDPR, which was good in theory, but created a whole set of new issues in practice.

    • gealb@lemmy.world
      25·
      1 year ago

      GDPR is fantastic and a big win for the consumer. It was so successful in fact, that it started to spread and other countries created similar laws.

      • The Hobbyist@lemmy.zip
        39·
        1 year ago

        It’s good, but that cookie banner is just bad… Though it’s not clear to me if it’s bad and not following the regulation or bad and following the regulation. It’s definitely not following the spirit as so many of those cookie banners are deep messes of hierarchical settings which any sane person would not waste time on…

        • Knusper@feddit.de
          15·
          1 year ago

          Legal cookie banners need to make consent as easy as nonconsent.

          So, if “Accept All” is a button, “Deny All” also needs to be a button.
          Also, you cannot refuse service to someone who refuses Cookies, unless they’re necessary to the functioning of the service.

          Without these principles, it wouldn’t be consent. You can’t force someone to give consent.

          You also do not need a Cookie banner, if:

          • you don’t track personal data. (GDPR literally does not apply.)
          • you only track personal data obviously required for the provided service, like a login cookie or a shopping cart cookie. (Implied Consent)
    • Gamey@feddit.rocks
      18·
      1 year ago

      The GDPR is one of the most important laws the EU ever created and the issues you talk about are probably cookie banners, that’s such a increadably tiny issue in a small part of a huge and hugely important law that this comment is nothing but fucking silly!

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      25·
      1 year ago

      Because they can use the EU to set these standards more broadly?

      Why write laws for your country specifically when the governing body a step higher is known to already be working on something very similar?

    • CAPSLOCKFTW@feddit.de
      20·
      1 year ago

      Individual countries do care. Germany has pretty comprehensive privacy laws already. And it is not only about privacy, it is also about power and regulation.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        4·
        1 year ago

        Not really a question, more of a statement. The U.S., China, even UK, and probably more have incredibly poor privacy laws, and keep aiming to strip even more privacy away. I’m just curious whats different about the EU that makes them do something actually good for people.

        • abrasiveteapot@sh.itjust.works
          2·
          1 year ago

          As no seems to have answered this, the EU’s political structure is more resistant to the anti-consumer desires of large corporates, particularly as the ones impacted aren’t European.

          Culturally the EU is diverse but broadly there is a lot more interest in / support for nurturing the common good (as opposed to beggar thy neighbour policies of the GOP). In particular pro-consumer policies are popular and get politicians re-elected, which segues to the next difference

          The EU is less influenced (not zero, less) by political donations from large corporates than the US. Very little of the priorities of the average person makes it into law in the US, a slightly larger sliver gets through in the EU.

        • QuazarOmega@lemy.lol
          1·
          1 year ago

          Sometimes things are done out of the goodness of people’s hearts, which makes sense when policies are brought up by some individuals, but also opposed by others. Ultimately they usually land, maybe for the lesser power the big tech corporations hold over the EU, but also for an egoistical desire to safeguard one’s own privacy that everyone has to some extent, especially people in power

    • ExLisper@linux.communityOPEnglish
      417·
      1 year ago

      Because all those Tech Giants are American or Chinese. EU is lagging behind US on innovation so now they want to make Tech Giants jobs more difficult in hopes that this will create some openings for EU tech firms. They don’t really care about you’re privacy that much, they just want it make more difficult for Google and Facebook to siphon money out of EU. It’s still great for us, don’t get me wrong.