Japan Preparing EU-Style Law to Force Apple to Allow App Sideloading and More

[MacRumors]

Japan is preparing antitrust legislation to force Apple to allow app sideloading and alternative payment methods for in-app purchases, Nikkei Asia reports.

The plans by Japan's Fair Trade Commission focus on combating Apple and Google's dominance in app stores and payments, search, browsers, and operating systems. The regulation could encompass a wide range of changes to Apple's practices, such as an obligation to allow users to utilize alternative app stores, effectively allowing sideloading on iPhones and iPads in Japan.

The regulation also looks to impose fines for violations of the rules amounting to around six percent of revenue earned from "problematic activities." The Fair Trade Commission's work on the legislation is ongoing, with plans to finalize it in the spring. The legislation will have to be approved by parliament in 2024 before coming into effect.

Japan's proposed regulation bears a strong resemblance to the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA), which is set to force Apple to enable app sideloading in the EU by March 2024 among other significant changes.

Article Link: Japan Preparing EU-Style Law to Force Apple to Allow App Sideloading and More

 

[Abazigal]

No word if Apple is still entitled to collect a cut of revenue made from apps purchased outside of the App Store (similar to what is happening with the Dutch dating apps).

 

[steve09090]

So the EU and Japan will also force their manufacturing companies to share their tech to enable anyone to do whatever they want to their products and maintain warranty over it?

 

[gpat]

As a lifetime Android user, I'm somewhat baffled by these mandates.
I've always voted with my wallet, but never thought that Apple had to be forced to add missing features to iOS.

 

[steve09090]

No problem with side loading but it should void any reliance of Apple to fix it when something goes wrong. And it will.

 

[xnsys]

Once again governments thinking that they can tell people and companies what to do, this will not end well, and will not benefit anybody in the long-run.

If you don't like Apple's business model, quite simply - go else where...

As soon as people realize that the government is there to represent the people, not control the people - the world will become a better place...to many in power have the desire for world dominance, at any cost.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

So the EU and Japan will also force their manufacturing companies to share their tech to enable anyone to do whatever they want to their products and maintain warranty over it?

Yes, because warranty is a right of the customer. In the past some parties even denied warranty if you attached a third party Ethernet cable to their devices. Notebook manufactures denied warranty if someone opened the notebook to add more RAM. I am glad those days are over.

 

[mdnz]

So the EU and Japan will also force their manufacturing companies to share their tech to enable anyone to do whatever they want to their products and maintain warranty over it?

 

[Skyscraperfan]

Once again governments thinking that they can tell people and companies what to do, this will not end well, and will not benefit anybody in the long-run.

If you don't like Apple's business model, quite simply - go else where...

As soon as people realize that the government is there to represent the people, not control the people - the world will become a better place...

Governments have to act in the interest of the customers. How can it be in the interest of the customers that Apple decides which apps they can install and gets a 30% share of every purchase? In the US consumer rights are pretty much non-existent, but that might change.

 

[xnsys]

So the EU and Japan will also force their manufacturing companies to share their tech to enable anyone to do whatever they want to their products and maintain warranty over it?

This is where the line between support and warranty will be drawn.

 

[steve09090]

Yes, because warranty is a right of the customer. In the past some parties even denied warranty if you attached a third party Ethernet cable to their devices. Notebook manufactures denied warranty if someone opened the notebook to add more RAM. I am glad those days are over.

So, for example, you buy a Honda. You replace the operating system with one you 'prefer' and Honda should honour the warranty. Right…

 

[xnsys]

Governments have to act in the interest of the customers. How can it be in the interest of the customers that Apple decides which apps they can install and gets a 30% share of every purchase? In the US consumer rights are pretty much non-existent, but that might change.

No, not customers - they have to represent the people...Governments are not here to tell businesses what to do and what not to do, that would be the customers , and they vote with their money / feet.

It's in the interest of the customers, as this will enable a business to be able to fully provide a service to the end users - providing support for a product - who knows what will happen if anonymous apps are allowed to be deployed - this opens up so many security concerns, such as the ability to eavesdrop (something we see constantly on Android).

I suspect that this is the real reason behind why the EU and Japan are looking at this, as it would allow them the ability to load in an app that would allow them to track and monitor anybody using the device - we know how the EU are already trying to block end-to-end encryption, and also iCloud Relay - they hate not knowing what people are doing.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

So, for example, you buy a Honda. You replace the operating system with one you 'prefer' and Honda should honour the warranty. Right…

Yes, unless they can prove that your changes caused the problems.

No, not customers - they have to represent the people...

It's in the interest of the customers, as this will enable a business to be able to fully provide a service to the end users - providing support for a product - who knows what will happen if anonymous apps are allowed to be deployed - this opens up so many security concerns, such as the ability to eavesdrop (something we see constantly on Android).

I suspect that this is the real reason behind why the EU and Japan are looking at this, as it would allow them the ability to load in an app that would allow them to track and monitor anybody using the device - we know how the EU are already trying to block end-to-end encryption, and also iCloud Relay - they hate not knowing what people are doing.

Strange that sideloading has never been a problem with a Mac. Shouldn't Macs be full of viruses, if your theory is true?

And Apple of course will still allow you to block any app from getting any information you do not want it to get. Your location, your images, microphone access and so on.

 

[koil]

Governments have to act in the interest of the customers. How can it be in the interest of the customers that Apple decides which apps they can install and gets a 30% share of every purchase? In the US consumer rights are pretty much non-existent, but that might change.

Bingo.

No, not customers - they have to represent the people...Governments are not here to tell businesses what to do and what not to do, that would be the customers , and they vote with their money / feet.

It's in the interest of the customers, as this will enable a business to be able to fully provide a service to the end users - providing support for a product - who knows what will happen if anonymous apps are allowed to be deployed - this opens up so many security concerns, such as the ability to eavesdrop (something we see constantly on Android).

I suspect that this is the real reason behind why the EU and Japan are looking at this, as it would allow them the ability to load in an app that would allow them to track and monitor anybody using the device - we know how the EU are already trying to block end-to-end encryption, and also iCloud Relay - they hate not knowing what people are doing.

Sideloaded apps will still be limited by app sandboxing, they won't automatically be able to track or monitor anything unless the user gives it those permissions.

Sure, this will enable governments to try something like that (force people to sideload an app Apple might have blocked, an app which will still require that a user gives it permissions like location, local network access, etc.), which is a shame, but had they wanted to do that they would have already been forcing people to use Android and having such apps installed.

Ironically, only Apple can currently provide signatures for apps to use the entitlements that allow apps to skip those checks, so it would be easier for a government to just tell Apple app X must be allowed on the App Store so that their constituents can install it. Whereas (and sure, we don't know exactly how this will play out yet) sideloaded apps will likely have a limited set of entitlements available to them. Yeah, some entitlements will probably be accessible to sideloaded apps that aren't available to App Store apps because of App Store rules, but it won't be location access without prompt...

 

[steve09090]

Bingo.


Sideloaded apps will still be limited by app sandboxing, they won't automatically be able to track or monitor anything unless the user gives it those permissions.

Sure, this will enable governments to try something like that, which is a shame, but had they wanted to do that they would have already been forcing people to use Android and having such apps installed.

If that were true, I could get on board. But as we have seen, there have been plenty of instances where nefarious code has made its way through Apples own vetting systems.

I don’t have a problem with alternative app payment methods.

 

[MuppetGate]

No problem with side loading but it should void any reliance of Apple to fix it when something goes wrong. And it will.

Exactly.

If people want to do it then fine, but the difference between allowing this on Macs and iPhones is resource constraints.

A badly written app on the Mac is not likely to reduce the life of the battery to a point many people would notice it. A badly written app, written without sensible constraints, and doing loads of stuff in the background (like cryptocurrency mining) is going to reduce the life of the battery on your phone. If you want to take the risk, fine, but I wouldn’t want to see this lead to a price hike for everyone else to cover the warranty repairs for those doing it.

 

[chrono1081]

How can it be in the interest of the customers that Apple decides which apps they can install and gets a 30% share of every purchase?

This isn't remotely what happens. First off, unless you're doing really well with your apps it's only a 15% cut. 30% is for people making over a million a year and it only applies to sales over 1 million for that year.

Second, everyone forgets what hosting apps was like before places like the App Store. It was a CRUSHING expense and you were responsible for all the things from website uptime, to security (a huge one, if you're an indie and your payment system got hacked you're screwed so bad), to distribution, to billing/payments. That stuff is not free and requires a ton of people to make it work.

With app stores all that got rolled into one SMALL (yes SMALL) fee. Want to know what percent game publishers used to take for a similar option? About 95%, sometimes even higher.

This is why people went nuts when the App Store came out, it was an utter steal to have all that handled for you. Also Apple isn't the only one that charges this fee. Google charges 30% the first year, Steam charges 30%, (Epic is lower at 12% but no one uses that store and there's catches.)

As for the "Apple decides what apps you can install" that's a good thing. There's so much trash/scams/etc that get submitted to the App Store and Apple weeds out that garbage. Would you trust the App Store if half the apps you downloaded were scams?

 

[JPack]

Everything is going digital. Sooner or later, everyone will be paying taxes, bills, and fees over apps. This is already happening in some countries. Governments don't want to pay a digital tax to Apple.

EU and Japan already lost the smartphone hardware game. They don't want to lose all the software revenue too.

 

[xnsys]

Yes, unless they can prove that your changes caused the problems.

All they would need to do is to put a clause in the warranty stating that if you do xxx then it's invalid - and this is legally binding, just like those legally binding software license agreements that nobody actually reads.

Strange that sideloading has never been a problem with a Mac. Shouldn't Macs be full of viruses, if your theory is true?

And Apple of course will still allow you to block any app from getting any information you do not want it to get. Your location, your images, microphone access and so on.

The question is, how do we know if it is or isn't? For all we know there could be sneaky software installed that allows government monitoring built into apps...

I trust the iPhone / iPad more than I do the Mac, but then again I do have a pretty good hardware firewall on the premises that would alert me if there was anything suspicious.

I see a lot of traffic with Windows, with a sizable quantity of data being sent to many xxx.microsoft.com xxx.trustedsource.org for example - don't have this with the Mac.

 

[Sorinut]

Everything is going digital. Sooner or later, everyone will be paying taxes, bills, and fees over apps. This is already done in some parts of the world. EU and Japan already lost the smartphone hardware game. They don't want to lose all the software revenue too.

Everything going digital =/= everything going to apps.

I can fully use the internet and live my day-to-day life without using any apps other than a browser.

 

[HMFIC03]

Yes, unless they can prove that your changes caused the problems.

Strange that sideloading has never been a problem with a Mac. Shouldn't Macs be full of viruses, if your theory is true?

And Apple of course will still allow you to block any app from getting any information you do not want it to get. Your location, your images, microphone access and so on.

🤔 Mac vs iPhone users HUGE disparity.. but I see your point

As for Apple restricting apps to access to hardware…? If they aren’t required to be in the App Store and then vetted, we can assume they will not have standard privacy labels or know what nefariousness will happen. I think we can all agree that consumer data mining pays more than software.

 

[AlexESP]

Strange that sideloading has never been a problem with a Mac. Shouldn't Macs be full of viruses, if your theory is true?

The PC market (including Macs) is full of scams, viruses and problems in general. Some people are okey with this tradeoff if the upside is more control.

I don’t have any problem myself, I know (more or less) what I do, but i.e. I’ve had to check my father’s Mac because a Chrome scam window kept showing up every minute.

As a company, if I made a new product (specially as sensitive as a phone), I’d prefer it to be more like the iPhone than the Mac.

 

[JPack]

Everything going digital =/= everything going to apps.

I can fully use the internet and live my day-to-day life without using any apps other than a browser.

EU and Japan want to leave that option open. Apple's App Store doesn't allow for that at all.

The only alternative would be to develop an independent OS like HarmonyOS and mega app containing mini-apps like WeChat. But EU and Japanese economy and markets are nowhere near big enough for that.

 

[koil]

If that were true, I could get on board. But as we have seen, there have been plenty of instances where nefarious code has made its way through Apples own vetting systems.

I don’t have a problem with alternative app payment methods.

Apps that exploit holes in the sandbox will be easier to install, absolutely, because they won't need to be approved by Apple, and won't need to be manually signed by a user. If you feel like that's too high of a risk then don't enable sideloading.

However, this change will make it much easier for security researchers to find such holes and report them to Apple. Rendering the whole platform more secure as a result.

 

[xnsys]

Everything is going digital. Sooner or later, everyone will be paying taxes, bills, and fees over apps. This is already happening in some countries. Governments don't want to pay a digital tax to Apple.

EU and Japan already lost the smartphone hardware game. They don't want to lose all the software revenue too.

We need to be mindful of the potential of this, with the introduction of the likes of the proposed CBDCs, this has the ability to ensure that freedoms are restricted - spend too much on water, beer, gas, food in a day, and that's it, nothing more for you till tomorrow / next week / year.... say something wrong to someone and you can't spend your hard earn money for a week...

Give a friend $10, and you could be taxed on that, or even buy a friend a beer in the local bar.

The whole thing stinks, and is nothing more than those at the EU/WEF/UN/FED to gain more and more world domination for their families.

The AppStore has been reliable and fine for years - people haven't been complaining from what I can see - so why the sudden desire to change it?