Y Combinator urges the White House to support Europe's Digital Markets Act

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Mixed views on the DMA and EU-style tech regulation

  • Many see the DMA as a “no-brainer” for user freedom and are proud the EU is willing to constrain large platforms, contrasting it with perceived US inaction.
  • Others argue DMA (like GDPR) mainly hurts smaller players while giants route around it, and that it is more about shifting market share than explicitly prioritizing users.

Apple, iOS lock-in, and sideloading

  • Large subthreads focus on Apple: walled-garden control, the App Store tax (15–30%), lack of VMs/JIT, and bans on certain categories (e.g. porn, emulators, torrent clients) are framed as core examples of gatekeeper abuse.
  • Commenters note concrete DMA effects: alternative app stores in the EU, support for non-WebKit browser engines (in principle), game emulators like Delta, and some loosening of App Store rules.
  • Many complain Apple’s compliance is “minimal and hostile” (core technology fees, notarization requirements, heavy friction for third‑party stores), with EU investigations cited as ongoing.

Effectiveness of GDPR/DMA enforcement

  • One camp claims GDPR/DMA are “all bark and no bite” because fines are small relative to revenue and companies remain in business while iterating pseudo‑compliance.
  • Others counter with specific behavior changes: stricter consent flows, data-access/deletion rights, internal engineering/organizational changes, and Facebook’s evolving ad‑profiling model. Even slow enforcement is still seen as materially reshaping practice.

Competition vs user experience

  • Some criticize DMA outcomes like Google being forced to unbundle maps and other vertical integrations, arguing this adds clicks and worsens UX purely to satisfy competitors.
  • Others say “fewer clicks” is not a valid justification for monopolistic self‑preferencing and that defaults and bundling are exactly how markets get locked up.

Privacy, data collection, and surveillance

  • Several want much stricter limits than the DMA: outright bans (not just opt‑in) on cross‑service tracking, data aggregation, and resale; heavy licensing for sensitive data like location; and routine audits and penalties for unnecessary collection.
  • Terms of service being treated as quasi‑law in the US and the CFAA are criticized as having enabled corporate “kangaroo courts” over users.

Digital ownership and secondary markets

  • Strong desire for digital purchases to behave like physical property: transferable, resellable, and resilient to platform shutdowns.
  • Ideas floated include a “secondary markets act,” formal distinctions between purchases and licenses with non‑waivable rights, and extending “right to repair” concepts to software and hardware lock‑in.

Broader political and structural points

  • Many doubt the US—especially under the current or a future Trump administration—will adopt anything resembling the DMA; regulation is seen as captured or gridlocked.
  • There is extensive frustration with monopolies and conglomerates (Apple, Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft) leveraging profits from one domain to invade others, and some argue simple rule: break them up or tax dominance progressively rather than relying only on behavior rules like the DMA.