The best analysis of this is from Stratechery: <a href="https://stratechery.com/2020/privacy-labels-and-lookalike-audiences/" rel="nofollow">https://stratechery.com/2020/privacy-labels-and-lookalike-au...</a><p>--<p>"Amazon, meanwhile, is increasingly where shopping searches start, particularly for Prime customers, and the company’s ad business is exploding. Needless to say, Amazon doesn’t need to request special permission for IDFAs or to share emails with 3rd parties to finely target its ads: everything is self-contained, and to the extent the company advertises on platforms like Google, it can still keep information about customer interests and conversions to itself. That means that in the long run, independent merchants who wish to actually find their customers will have no choice but to be an Amazon third-party merchant instead of setting up an independent shop on a platform like Shopify.<p>This decision, to be clear, will not be because Amazon was acting anticompetitively; the biggest driver — which, by the way, will also benefit Facebook’s on-platform commerce efforts — will be Apple, which, in the pursuit of privacy, is systematically destroying the ability of platform-driven small businesses to compete with the Internet giants."<p>--<p>FB has a point here, but I'm still hoping Apple wins - I'd rather the tracking model not be viable.
I try to evaluate these BigCo vs. BigCo battles individually rather than always dissing one company or being a fanboy for another. In that vein, I support Apple in its attempts to clamp down on FB’s egregious tracking and data collection. At the same time, I support Epic’s attempts to break up Apple’s stranglehold on in-app payments. On that last issue specifically, I am even sympathetic to FB’s claim against Apple.
I think Facebook has 2 or 3 targets here.<p>They want to force Apple to open up the restriction on the App Store. Apple has been slowly turning the screws making it more and more difficult to get information out of the phone. I'm not sure Facebook is going to be able to get that, but I suspect they have a plan B which is iMessage.<p>iMessage is Apple's secret "Social Network". When I quit Facebook, it's what I turned to, and I know a lot of people who rely on it as their primary way of keeping in touch with friends/ family and the increasing functionality of iMessage is becoming more of a threat to FB.<p>While Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and all the other messaging apps have to beg to get access to Photos, Location, ApplePay, cameras, FaceId, etc, with iMessage everything is permitted out of the box. Apple has a whole mini-App Store for iMessage which isn't really possible with Facebook.<p>Finally, I'm sure Facebook would absolutely love to open up their own Ad-supported App Store which tracks everyone to their hearts content. Piles of money building an App Store, particularly when someone else is building the whole tool-chain to make it work and you just have to serve up the content.
Note that it <i>is</i> possible for these accusations to have some merit even if the accuser has engaged in similar things on their own.<p>There's no need to group every interaction into political dichotomies.
I am heavily on Apple’s side on this. People like my wife and me want a safe, privacy environment and Apple delivers. (I have two Linux laptops for out-of-the-garden use).<p>Apple does deserve a little criticism for the App Store, but their softening fees for most developers helps. Compared to Facebook (a blight on civilization, IMHO) Apple is couth indeed.
People claiming that Apple can do "whatever it wants" are definitely wrong, but in all of the discussion on this article I don't see anything like the following: which <i>current antitrust law</i> is Apple violating with this behavior?<p>There are a very small number of such laws (Sherman Act, Clayton Act, Celler-Kefauver, Hart-Scott-Rodino, Robinson-Patman, plus three or four others). Someone who wants to make a case that this is a "clear" antitrust violation (definitely the attitude of some in this thread!) should point to which law has been violated. Even better: point to similar case law from earlier decisions. Just arguing that this behavior is "bad" is not going to be that persuasive to a court<p>You can think Apple is right or wrong on this issue, but to say that the antitrust case against Apple is clear is quite different. <i>Why</i> is it a clear case?
I dislike Facebook and even without using their platform (account was deleted years ago) my PiHole #1 DNS queries are all related to Facebook. They are the cancer of the web.<p>If I want a moated ecosystem for my smartphone I am happy to have this option with Apple. If I wanted open I can go with any of the Android options. I have a choice.<p>I do not need Facebook to remove that choice for me in their efforts to violate my privacy further.
Facebook is more popular than iOS, and they maintain a developer platform as well. What kinds of distinctions could they draw which force Apple to open up its platform without also having to open up the Facebook SDK? Should courts force Facebook to allow apps that populate newsfeed?
Each time the issue of action to force Apple to open the App Store comes up, I usually mention that Facebook will be the first to open a store.<p>If Facebook prevails, at the very least every developer and every user will have to deal with both Apple’s store <i>and</i> Facebook’s store.<p>We know that Facebook will permit apps which do tracking without consent.<p>This situation is objectively worse for both consumers <i>and</i> developers than what we have now.<p>It’s also worth pointing out that Facebook would be unaffected, or indeed May even benefit if the overall app marketplace contracted due to erosion of user trust.
I think this is going to <i>protect</i> Apple from antitrust lawsuits. Nobody like Facebook in the current government. They certainly won't help Facebook in this case. This is all on top of how absurd and unpopular this lawsuit is to begin with.
Wow. I didn't realize that all we needed to bat back the absurd monopolistic practices of the tech giants was a big tech civil war.<p>The absurdity is compounded by the fact regulators never had the gumption to hunt the tigers themselves.
It is entirely appropriate to consider Apple's conduct as anti-competitive and/or acting as part of a cartel, without asserting that the appropriate remedy is an injunction allowing Facebook to utilize user's unique device ID's to the benefit of Facebook's ads systems for ad targeting.<p>In other words, this particular case may help elucidate Apple's dominance/influence on the market, but that does not necessarily mean that the privacy changes in and of themselves are the foundational antitrust issue.
All of this presupposes the current flavor of programatic advertising is something worth protecting. IMO, the cost of the current targeting methods -factoring in the actors and practices of the attached data economy- is simply not worth it. Not even close. I applaud Apple's intentions, but I’m afraid they’ve made a tactical error that will only serve to cement bad practices at the end of all the lawsuits and government inquiries. Fingers crossed.
There was a story; when Google+ was released, Zuckerberg started saying “Carthage must fall”, seeing it as an existential threat to Facebook in the same way as Cato saw Carthage as an existential threat to the Roman Republic.<p>If that story was true about Google+, he’s probably saying something similar about Apple today.<p>Given what happened in DC a few weeks ago, given what happened in Myanmar since late 2016, given that what FB is suing to prevent is a thing which I read as <i>legally required for operation in the EU</i> (GDPR requires genuine opt-in IIUC), given the monopolistic behaviour FB is demonstrating with Oculus and other purchases?<p>Facebook delenda est.
I still don't understand is Apple conservative about AppStore because of security reasons or like Zuck said they prefer their own apps and services. I mean if Google open sourced Android why wouldn't Apple ease their AppStore policies?
All power to Facebook!<p>I can (and do) block Facebook and be almost not affected with what they do, but iPhones as part of a duopoly cannot be avoided. I like and use Apple hardware but hope that Facebook and Epic rip them into pieces. It's completely inacceptable that a single company holds the sole power to access such a widespread platform. There needs to be a side-loading choice and alternative app stores.
Any chances of having juicy revelations like those we had with Apple v.s. Samsung? I loved the early prototypes and Samsung "Apple did this, we did this, fix it to make ours the way Apple is" documents that came out as evidence in the court.
I just want to be able to build an app and put it on my phone, which I supposedly own, without having to jump through any of Apple's hoops.<p>Is this lawsuit going to help me in any way?
Facebook is fighting the good fight for evil reasons. They complain that Apple's restrictions on apps are not applied to their own apps, given them an unfair advantage and also preventing people from developing real QoL improving apps for iPhones. That sounds reasonable. But then the stated reason is that Facebook wants to be able to better track what people are doing with their phones, so now I want both sides to lose.
>the iPhone-maker abused its power in the smartphone market by forcing app developers to abide by App Store rules that Apple’s own apps don’t have to follow<p>Yeah... So?
Facebook: “Your honor, Apple implemented a prompt to ask people whether they want 3rd parties to track them, using their own data.”<p>Judge: “Case closed.”
While I might not like Facebook, I am supporting them on this decision. It is dire time to get rid of the App Stores, Google's and Apple's, they are a net negative for everyone except them.<p>If you are a small developer, you can get review bombed and your app download rate can take a drastic hit, while if you are cozy with the big players (<i>wink wink</i> RobbingHood) Google will take down your 100k negative reviews.<p>They keep reaping the rewards for doing absolutely nothing, except having the app be searchable.<p>You do your own marketing, you develop your own app, you design your own app, you have nothing from Apple except that you need to ask for their permission to push your product on their walled garden.<p>Of course I would love not to push it on the App Store, but they do not allow competition on iOS, which is the prime case for anti-trust.<p>iOS does not make the smartphone experience, the apps make the smartphone experience. The order of priority should not be forgotten.<p>If Spotify, Facebook, Google, Netflix and Amazon disappeared overnight from the App Store, I would love to see how willing would people be for their "eco-system" (walled garden)??