France Refuses To Block Apple's Big Privacy Changes

The online ad industry has been trying to stymie Apple's latest privacy enhancements by claiming they amount to an antitrust violation. However, early signs suggest the effort may be doomed. On Wednesday, the French Competition Authority refused to tell Apple to hold off implementing the changes, which will stop apps tracking iPhone and iPad users without their explicit consent, or force Apple to negotiate with app developers. From a report: The watchdog said what Apple was doing did not appear to be abusive, as "a company, even if it is in a dominant position ... has the freedom in principle to set rules to access its services, subject to not disregarding the laws and applicable regulations and that these rules are not anticompetitive." However, although the Competition Authority did not grant the "interim measures" that the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) France and others had been seeking, it said it would continue investigating the merits of the case to see if Apple's new privacy rules allow the company itself to track users more than others can. Apple announced the contentious changes in June last year and was due to implement them in the fall, but complaints from Facebook and much of the ad industry led it to delay the move until early this year. Apple said in January that the changes would finally arrive in early spring. The iPhone maker attaches a unique code to each device, known as Identification for Advertisers, or IDFA. Advertisers can use this tag to monitor what users do in apps and how they interact with ad campaigns.

Keeping watch

[Sebby]

it said it would continue investigating the merits of the case to see if Apple's new privacy rules allow the company itself to track users more than others can.

Good. I believe that at some point, pressure will mount on Apple from their real customers (their shareholders) for even more revenue, and that will invariably lead to Apple looking at other ways to monetize consumers of its products. The limits they’re putting in place now also means they’ll have greater access to data than others would have, which puts them in the same kind of position companies like Google and FB are now.

Re:Keeping watch

[FudRucker]

i hope not, i would like to see Apple be a privacy respecting company, and it would give the iphone an edge over android phones if the customer's privacy is the #1 policy

Re:

[Freischutz]

i hope not, i would like to see Apple be a privacy respecting company, and it would give the iphone an edge over android phones if the customer's privacy is the #1 policy

If they can get Apple to follow Apple's own rules then that's even better. Now let the spotlight move to even more egregious violators of our privacy: Google, Facebook, Twitter, ...

Re:

[Sebby]

Now let the spotlight move to even more egregious violators of our privacy: Google, Facebook, Twitter, ...

Some of whom I call "Privacy Rapists".

Re: Keeping watch

[saloomy]

Rape implies a lack of consent. If you use either, you consented to it. Duck duck go is your friend.

Re:

[Sebby]

Some have never signed up on Facebook, yet they have shadow profiles from their tracking bugs all over the web, or from info submitted to it without their consent by Facebook members. And then you have the type of crap pulled by Clearview AI.

”Privacy Rapists” is definitely an accurate description here.

Re:

[Sebby]

I do hope this as well, but as long as they’re beholden to their shareholders, there will always be the possibility (in other words, I would trust them more if they were instead a private company - then they’d be accountable to their actual users).

Re:

[gnasher719]

Since when is Apple "beholden to their shareholders"? My old boss had this saying "Look after your employees, and look after your customers, and the shareprice will look after itself.". It worked very well for his company. It has worked even better for Apple over the last 20 years.

Re:

[tlhIngan]

I do hope this as well, but as long as theyâ(TM)re beholden to their shareholders, there will always be the possibility (in other words, I would trust them more if they were instead a private company - then theyâ(TM)d be accountable to their actual users).

A few years ago, an institutional shareholder tried to do that. They asked Apple why Apple was spending millions on dollars on climate change stuff, carbon offsets, and other things with no financial return. They hated it so much they even put up

Re:

[omfglearntoplay]

Yep. They better keep consumer privacy held in high regards, or they'll be losing a lot of customers.

Re: Keeping watch

[SleepingEye]

Lmfao, you think apl is a privacy respecting company. You must still believe them after all the lies they tell... you're holding it wrong (yet they only temporarily offered bumpers), we're checking apps for bad stuff (yet malware gets through ununnounced), we're not sellings ads like the bad guys at FB and Google!

What pressure from shareholders?

[SuperKendall]

pressure will mount on Apple from their real customers (their shareholders) for even more revenue,

Why would pressure mount from shareholders to destroy the very thing that has allowed to grow Apple so large, and have massive profits every quarter? That is just nonsense.

Sensible decision

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

The choice here is doing fucking Apple a favor (yuck) or the fucking advertising industry (triple-yuck). They chose the single yuck. Sounds logical...

Re:

[Asynchronously]

How is this "doing Apple a favor"?

Blocking wouldâ(TM)ve have been inconsistent

[Logger]

Blocking this would have gone against the general direction in the EU right now. Seems far more likely that France will force Apple to ensure they are playing by the same rules as they are making third parties play by. They may even try to require Apple to go even further in this direction.

I could see them forcing the Google Play store to adopt similar measures.