Italy’s competition regulatory body, Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), has imposed a fine of € 98.6 million ($ 116 million) on Apple due to its App Tracking Transparency (ATT) feature. This article delves into the context surrounding the issue, specifics of the penalty, and the consequences for Apple.
### A Brief Overview
Since the launch of App Tracking Transparency in April 2021, Apple has encountered backlash from numerous companies and media organizations concerning the execution of this feature. Detractors claim that although ATT enforces stringent restrictions on third-party applications regarding data gathering and tracking, Apple’s own services are not subject to equivalent limitations.
Apple justifies its stance by asserting that it has structured its offerings—such as Siri, Maps, FaceTime, and iMessage—in a manner that prevents the association of user data across these platforms. Nevertheless, the company has been under the spotlight from various antitrust probes, notably regarding whether ATT yields anticompetitive outcomes.
Recently, Apple has made moves to counter antitrust apprehensions in several nations, including Germany, France, and Brazil, where it has encountered similar probes and penalties.
### The Italian Penalty
The AGCM’s penalty against Apple arises from what it refers to as the “exploitation of a dominant market position.” The authority carried out a thorough investigation in cooperation with the European Commission and other national competition bodies, along with the Italian Data Protection Authority.
The investigation found that the ATT policy is limiting from a competition-law viewpoint. In particular, third-party app developers are required to get explicit consent for data collection and linking for advertising purposes via Apple’s ATT prompt. However, this prompt does not meet the requirements of privacy legislation, compelling developers to apply a secondary consent request for the same objectives.
The AGCM indicated that Apple’s ATT policies are imposed unilaterally and adversely affect the interests of its business partners. The authority described the feature as excessive compared to the data protection aims Apple professes to follow.
While recognizing that Apple might have valid reasons for instituting privacy protections, the AGCM criticized the policies as overly burdensome for developers and disproportionate to the privacy protection intentions.
Additionally, the present execution of ATT mandates that developers seek consent twice for identical purposes, as the ATT prompt fails to satisfy the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) consent stipulations, requiring developers to incorporate additional consent methods.
Apple has expressed its plan to contest the fine. For more information, the complete decision is available on the AGCM’s official site.
### Conclusion
The penalty levied by Italy’s AGCM underscores the persistent conflicts between privacy initiatives and competition in the technology sector. As Apple tackles these issues, the ramifications of the ATT feature and its implementation will remain under careful examination by regulators and developers alike.
