logo
The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech

The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech

Yahoo08-05-2025

For years, federal lawmakers and regulators have used their power to penalize Big Tech companies for successfully serving American consumers. Rep. Kat Cammack (R–Fla.) is continuing this trend.
On Tuesday, Cammack introduced the App Store Freedom Act, which intends to promote competition in the digital marketplace by forcing interoperability and open app development requirements on widely used app stores and operating systems. While Cammack says the bill will promote consumer choice, it would unintentionally deny consumers the ability to choose a private, secure, and reliable smartphone experience.
The legislation was introduced less than a week after a federal judge ruled against Apple in a five-year-long antitrust case brought against it by Epic Games. Epic sued Apple in 2020 for "forcing app makers to use its payment system in exchange for access to the App Store," from which it collects a 30 percent commission, explains The New York Times. The judge ordered Apple in 2022 to allow developers to solicit payment from users outside the App Store and, most recently, forbade Apple from taking any commission on these sales.
The App Store Freedom Act would require smartphone companies with over 100 million users in the U.S. to allow the installation of third-party app stores, as well as third-party apps, on their operating systems. It also forces covered companies to provide third-party developers with free access to all features accessible to their partners (those developers that only use the company's app store). Finally, the legislation would outlaw requiring developers to use the company's in-app payment system and require companies to allow developers to offer deals through a payment system not owned by the company.
Shoshana Weissmann, resident technology and innovation fellow at the R Street Institute, tells Reason that the bill "isn't about apps at all but dislike of certain providers." Android permits users to download apps from "Unknown Sources," i.e., outside of the Google Play Store, so most provisions of the legislation don't apply to it; the act seems to be a bill of attainder against Apple. Compelling Apple to modify its iOS operating system to allow third-party app stores requires it to "change core security functions that protect everyone's data," not just those who install third-party apps, says Amy Bos, director of state and federal affairs for NetChoice, a trade association that advocates for free enterprise on the internet.
Bos explains that the proposed legislation may require covered companies to give developers access to "lower-level system interfaces not designed for third-party access [and] hardware features with security implications (biometric sensors, secure enclaves)," raising security concerns for all users—even those who do not install third-party apps. Alex Reinauer, a research fellow with the Center for Technology and Innovation at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, tells Reason that the bill would largely eliminate the vetting process companies have to decide which developers may access certain APIs. "Opening up all API access to all third parties raises the risk of malware and generally threatens system reliability," explains Reinauer.
Jennifer Huddleston, senior fellow in technology policy at the Cato Institute, says the bill's requirement that app stores allow additional payment systems may open up cybersecurity concerns and dilute the trust of app stores that new apps often rely on. Reinauer predicts that covered companies would limit features across the board to avoid having to share them with dubious developers, which would likewise reduce innovation.
The bill itself recognizes that it may inadvertently render iPhones—and the 155 million Americans who use them—less secure; it disclaims that it does not "require a covered company…to provide service under a hardware or software warranty for damage caused by a third-party app or app store." That means if users are harmed by third-party apps, they will not be able to seek damages from Apple or Google.
The App Store Freedom Act is not a victory for the free market or consumer choice. Instead, it seeks to plan the digital economy, forcing private companies to modify their operating systems while depriving consumers of their digital and financial security. Even for those who share Cammack's goal of "hold[ing] Big Tech accountable and prompt[ing] competition," compromising smartphone user data is a poor means of achieving this objective.
The post The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech appeared first on Reason.com.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

After vowing ‘90 deals in 90 days,' the White House's rhetoric runs into reality
After vowing ‘90 deals in 90 days,' the White House's rhetoric runs into reality

Yahoo

time32 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

After vowing ‘90 deals in 90 days,' the White House's rhetoric runs into reality

Donald Trump clearly wants the public to believe he recently struck a trade deal with China. The president did not actually reach such an agreement, but he's leaned into his fictional narrative with great enthusiasm lately. Last Thursday, for example, the Republican published an item to his social media platform, noting that he'd spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping about 'the intricacies of our recently made, and agreed to, Trade Deal.' Soon after, during an Oval Office event, he again touted the same 'trade deal.' A day later, Trump posted a follow-up item, announcing the members of a delegation who would travel to London to meet with Chinese officials about 'the Trade Deal.' The bad news is that the 'trade deal' in question does not exist, no matter how many times the American president pretends otherwise. The good news is that administration officials will actually have some discussions with their Chinese counterparts. NBC News reported: Senior U.S. and Chinese officials will meet in London on Monday in an effort to de-escalate the bitter trade dispute between the world's two biggest economies that has roiled the global economy, with China's restrictions on critical minerals high on the agenda. About a month ago, Trump announced what he characterized as a 'deal' with China, but the closer one looked at the details, the more the truth came into focus. Georgetown University professor Abraham Newman wrote a great piece for MSNBC that explained, "While the U.S. did avoid a major economic calamity, this is not a deal. The U.S. blinked. ... Far from some diplomatic coup, the U.S. climb down reflects the economic risks of maintaining such high tariffs.' The editorial board of The Wall Street Journal came to the same conclusion, noting, '[T]he China deal is more surrender than Trump victory.' Complicating matters, while the White House and Beijing reached a tentative agreement that paused the two countries' tit-for-tat tariffs, both countries have since accused each other of violating the agreement. All of which brings to mind Peter Navarro, the White House's top trade adviser, who boasted in April, 'We're going to run 90 deals in 90 days.' Navarro added that such a plan 'is possible' in part because 'the boss is going to be the chief negotiator.' Roughly two months later, the grand total currently stands at zero. Generous observers might be inclined to give Trump credit for striking a deal with the U.K., but as The Washington Post's Dana Milbank summarized in his latest column, that deal is really more of a 'vaguely phrased framework with Britain that still hasn't been made public.' What's more, a new Politico report added that a month after the agreement was announced, the U.S.-U.K. duties 'remain in place' and 'there is still no clear timeline for when they'll lift.' Or to put it another way, two-thirds of the way into the '90 deals in 90 days' vow, the White House appears to be 90 deals short. Undeterred, Navarro returned to Fox Business late last week, where he was asked when the public should expect to see some breakthroughs. 'We will have deals,' Navarro said. 'It takes time. Usually, it takes months and years. In this administration, it's gonna take more like days.' On average, the typical timeframe for a U.S. trade deal is roughly 30 months. That didn't deter Navarro from pushing the '90 deals in 90 days' talking point in April, and it apparently didn't stop him from claiming again last week that Team Trump will produce amazing results in a matter of days. The White House's top trade adviser should be going out of his way right now to lower expectations after already having set an impossibly high bar. For reasons unknown, Navarro is doing the opposite, setting up the Trump administration for additional failure. This article was originally published on

Trump Continues Inflaming L.A. Protests: ‘BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!'
Trump Continues Inflaming L.A. Protests: ‘BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!'

Yahoo

time32 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump Continues Inflaming L.A. Protests: ‘BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!'

President Donald Trump called for the military to be deployed against anti-Immigrations and Customs Enforcements (ICE) protests in Los Angeles, California. The protests, which began in response to ICE raids at various workplaces on Friday, escalated over the weekend after Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops into the city over the objections of Mayor Karen Bass and California Governor Gavin Newsom, both Democrats. 'Looking really bad in L.A. BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!' Trump wrote early Monday morning on Truth Social. In another post, the president called for law enforcement to 'ARREST THE PEOPLE IN FACE MASKS, NOW!' U.S. Northern Command issued a statement on Sunday indicating that 'approximately 500 Marines from 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines at Twentynine Palms, California, are in a prepared to deploy status should they be necessary to augment and support the DoD's protection of federal property and personnel efforts.' The call from the president to deploy the military against U.S. citizens — a power that hasn't been invoked by a president since the 1992 Rodney King riots in Los Angeles — would be a serious escalation of federal involvement in what local authorities say remains a manageable, if in sporadic instances violent, outbreak of public protest. Some Republican lawmakers and Trump administration officials have indicated their support for the deployment of military personnel to California. On Sunday night, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) shared a screenshot of a controversial opinion piece he wrote in 2020 calling for the military to be deployed against Black Lives Matter protests. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote on social media Sunday night that 'if violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized — they are on high alert.' The president and his administration have targeted Los Angeles and several other so-called 'sanctuary cities' — cities and other state or local jurisdictions that limit its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement — as sites to conduct highly publicized ICE raids on immigrant communities. While the administration claims that they are focusing enforcement actions on criminals, Acting ICE Director Tom Homan admitted on Monday that ICE has been sweeping up migrants who just so happened to be at the location of one of their targets, including mothers, high school students, and migrants arriving to immigration court for scheduled hearings. As the administration's enforcement actions grow in intensity, and stray from the bounds of legality, Trump and his allies have claimed protests against their increasingly authoritarian tactics are effectively an illegal impediment to federal operations. 'A once great American City, Los Angeles, has been invaded and occupied by Illegal Aliens and Criminals. Now violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking our Federal Agents to try and stop our deportation operations,' Trump wrote on Sunday in a post that bears little resemblance to what is actually happening in the city. 'Order will be restored, the Illegals will be expelled, and Los Angeles will be set free.' In a Sunday press conference, Mayor Bass said that 'what we're seeing in Los Angeles is chaos that has been provoked by the administration.' 'When you're at Home Depot and workplaces, when you tear parents and children apart, and when you run armored caravans to our streets you cause fear and you cause panic and deploying federalized troops is a dangerous escalation,' Bass said. 'We need to be real about this, this is about another agenda, it's not about public safety.' Bass added that the city remained committed to protecting the First Amendment rights of protesters, but that those legal protections 'do not give you the right to be violent to create chaos are to be violent to create chaos are to vandalize property.' Governor Newsom formally requested on Sunday that Trump revoke his federalization of the National Guard and withdraw them from the city. 'In dynamic and fluid situations such as the one in Los Angeles, State and local authorities are the most appropriate ones to evaluate the need for resources to safeguard life and property. Indeed, the decision to deploy the National Guard, without appropriate training or orders, risks seriously escalating the situation,' he wrote. 'There is currently no need for the National Guard to be deployed in Los Angeles, and to do so in this unlawful manner and for such a lengthy period is a serious breach of state sovereignty that seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation,' Newsom added. More from Rolling Stone Finneas Says He Was Tear-Gassed During 'Very Peaceful' ICE Protest in L.A. ABC News Suspends Journalist for Calling Stephen Miller and Trump 'World-Class Haters' Republicans Say They're Cool With Trump Deploying Troops Against Protesters Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence

Apple Poised to Monetize AI at WWDC 2025
Apple Poised to Monetize AI at WWDC 2025

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Apple Poised to Monetize AI at WWDC 2025

Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) looks ready to kick off its AI monetization era with system-wide updates at WWDC 2025, Wedbush's Daniel Ives says, setting the stage for paid AI features across the Apple ecosystem. The keynote at 1 p.m. ET today at Apple Park will unveil '26 upgrades for macOS, iOS and iPadOS powered by Apple Intelligence, countering Street skepticism about a slow AI rollout. In his Monday note, Ives argued that WWDC marks the start of Apple's AI cash flow, not a mere feature demo, as the company layers new AI-driven capabilities into core OS updates. He expects details on Siri's deeper integration with Google's Gemini and OpenAI's ChatGPT, demonstrating how Apple will embed AI across native apps to drive user engagementand, ultimately, device upgrades when iPhone 17 ships next year. With over 100 million iPhones in China due for an upgrade, Ives also eyes an announcement on Apple's partnership with Alibaba (NYSE:BABA) to deploy AI services locally, a move he calls critical for unlocking growth in the world's largest smartphone market. Wedbush reiterates its Outperform rating and raises its 12-month price target to $270, noting that Apple's edge isn't in building the most advanced large language model but in toll-collecting'' on its vast hardware base. Apple's unmatched ecosystem ensures that any third-party AI app must run through Cupertino, highlighting how AI unlocks new services revenue without upending its product strategy. Why It Matters: WWDC's AI announcements could shift Wall Street sentiment, validating Apple's long-term AI strategy and fueling expectations for recurring software revenue beyond hardware sales. Investors will watch for concrete details on AI feature pricing, Siri-Gemini integrations and the Alibaba tie-up during today's keynote and in the follow-up developer sessions. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store