Italian Competition Authority Fines Apple $115M for Abusing Dominant Position

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Scope of the Ruling

  • Focus is on Apple’s App Tracking Transparency (ATT) on iOS since 2021.
  • Third‑party apps must use Apple’s ATT prompt for tracking consent; the authority says this prompt is not GDPR‑compliant and lacks sufficient information.
  • Because ATT is deemed insufficient, third parties must show a second consent dialog, while Apple’s own advertising and services are not subject to the same friction.
  • Summary document (linked in the thread) says this double consent harms developers/advertisers and that App Store commissions and Apple’s own ad revenues increased as a result, qualifying as an “exploitative abuse” of a dominant position.

Privacy vs Competition

  • Many initially react as if Italy is “punishing Apple for protecting privacy” and helping advertisers spy on users.
  • Others stress the case is about competition, not whether tracking is good or bad: Apple allegedly uses platform control to tilt the ad/attribution market in its favor.
  • Some argue that improving competition in the “market for privacy violations” is socially harmful, but that laws must still be enforced consistently.
  • There is disagreement over whether Apple truly has no extra tracking power versus third parties; some say ATT only blocks third‑party trackers, others point to Apple Search Ads using install/revenue/retention data that users cannot realistically avoid.

Motives and Legitimacy of EU / Italy

  • One camp claims Italy/EU use vague, Kafkaesque regulation to “shake down” large US tech firms, likening it to mafia‑style rent extraction and noting recurrent 100M+ fines.
  • Counter‑arguments:
    • Fines are tiny relative to national/EU budgets; they are not a serious revenue strategy.
    • European and domestic firms are fined too; this case began with a complaint (from Meta), not out of the blue.
    • If companies dislike EU rules, they can exit the market—but most agree Apple can’t realistically abandon such a large region without shareholder revolt.

App Store Power, Alternatives, and Broader Politics

  • Some see this as consistent with long‑standing concern over Apple’s gatekeeping of iOS; others say the optics are bad because the immediate “beneficiary” is adtech, not end‑users.
  • Discussion of third‑party app stores (AltStore, Setapp) notes EU/Japan limitations and Apple’s continued leverage via notarization.
  • Broader debate emerges over EU tech stagnation, “parasite vs builder” narratives, US vs EU quality of life, and whether stricter regulation inherently suppresses innovation.

Community Split and Process Concerns

  • Commenters note HN is not monolithic: those who hate tracking but also hate walled gardens react differently.
  • Some question procedure: if the behavior ran for years, was there a clear warn‑then‑fix window before retroactive fines, or is this “timing exploitation” by the state? Status on that is unclear from the thread.