Home Privacy Facebook Commissioned Research That Says Apple’s iOS 14.5 Changes Are Anticompetitive

Facebook Commissioned Research That Says Apple’s iOS 14.5 Changes Are Anticompetitive

SHARE:
Epic Games just finished waging its antitrust battle against Apple in the courtroom, but Facebook is taking a somewhat subtler approach against Apple.
Kumamoto, JAPAN - Jan 31 2021 : Apple and Facebook icons on iPhone. Apple announced that new privacy features in its next iOS 14 update that will released in early spring in 2021

Epic Games has just finished waging its antitrust battle against Apple in the courtroom, but Facebook is taking a more subtle approach against Apple.

On Thursday, an academic paper was published by two legal and business scholars funded by Facebook. The paper offers an excoriating take on Apple’s iOS 14 policy update, which the authors call “an anticompetitive strategy disguised as a privacy-protecting measure.”

The work was co-authored by Feng Zhu, an associate professor of business administration at the Harvard Business School, and D. Daniel Sokol, a professor of law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law. Zhu and Sokol are, to be fair, very upfront about Facebook’s support of their research.

What’s most interesting here is to see Facebook putting some muscle and money behind building an antitrust case against Apple … particularly considering that Facebook is being investigated for alleged antitrust violations of its own.

Most of Zhu and Sokol’s main arguments are already hot topics of debate circulating within the advertising ecosystem.

The paper’s main takeaways fall into a few primary, interrelated buckets, including:

  • Apple’s broad definition of what constitutes “tracking;”
  • The fact that users are automatically opted in to see personalized advertising from Apple, but third-party developers need to ask permission on an app-by-app basis
  • Apple’s alleged moves to preference its own products and services;
  • How these practices impact access to free content and ad-supported business models, not to mention helping to entrench Apple’s dominance of the OS market.

Zhu and Sokol claim that, by prohibiting third-party apps from engaging in broad categories of data use (which Apple “unilaterally” defines as “tracking” unless there’s an explicit user opt-in, of course), publishers and advertisers will lose their ability to effectively match consumers with relevant ads and to measure the results.

If an ad-supported business model is no longer lucrative because marketers can’t gauge it’s effectiveness, developers will increasingly turn to subscriptions and in-app purchases in order to monetize. Then, Apple will be able to take a cut. So the argument goes.

Regardless, the onus needs to be on Apple to clearly explain why its AppTrackingTransparency framework is necessary considering there are already privacy laws on the books around the world that govern data use, Zhu told AdExchanger.

“What is the relevant privacy shortfall that Apple is trying to remedy, especially for third parties that have already complied with applicable privacy laws?” Zhu said. “Apple should bear the burden of documenting the consumer benefits [of ATT] – especially for apps that have already adopted privacy protection measures – and also minimize harms to competition.”

The white paper’s findings closely align with Facebook’s public stance on Apple’s ATT.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

During Facebook’s Q4 2020 earnings call in January, for example, Mark Zuckerberg claimed that Apple is now one of Facebook’s biggest competitors. He also knocked Apple for having ulterior motives behind the privacy changes it made in iOS 14.

“Apple may say they’re doing this to help people, but these moves clearly track their interests,” Zuckerberg, with an inflammatory flourish, told investors earlier this year. “We and others will be up against this for the foreseeable future.”

Must Read

The Trade Desk Maintains Its High Growth Rate And Touts New Channels

“It’s hard not to be bullish about CTV when it’s both our largest channel and our fastest growing,” said The Trade Desk Founder and CEO Green during the company’s earnings report on Thursday.

After The Election, News Corp Has Harsh Words For Advertisers Who Avoided News

News Corp’s chief exec blasted “the blatant biases of ad agencies and ad associations,” which are “boycotting certain media properties” due to “personal political prejudices.”

LiveRamp Outperforms On Earnings And Lays Out Its Data Network Ambitions

LiveRamp reported an unexpected boost to Q3 revenue, from $160 million last year to $185 million in 2024, during its quarterly call with investors on Wednesday.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters
Google in the antitrust crosshairs (Law concept. Single line draw design. Full length animation illustration. High quality 4k footage)

Google And The DOJ Recap Their Cases In The Countdown To Closing Arguments

If you’re trying to read more than 1,000 pages of legal documents about the US v. Google ad tech antitrust case on Election Day, you’ve come to the right place.

NYT’s Ad And Subscription Revenue Surge As WaPo Flails

While WaPo recently lost 250,000 subscribers due to concerns over its journalistic independence, NYT added 260,000 subscriptions in Q3 thanks largely to the popularity of its non-news offerings.

Mark Proulx, global director of media quality & responsibility, Kenvue

How Kenvue Avoided $3 Million In Wasted Media Spend

Stop thinking about brand safety verification as “insurance” – a way to avoid undesirable content – and start thinking about it as an opportunity to build positive brand associations, says Kenvue’s Mark Proulx.