Privacy has been one of Apple’s great arguments to explain why its ecosystem works differently. It is not just a technical issue, but a narrative built over years. Precisely for this reason it is surprising that a tool presented as an advance for the user is at the center of a fine of almost one hundred million euros.
The Italian Competition Authority has imposed a fine of 98.6 million euros on Apple for abuse of a dominant position, considering that the implementation of App Tracking Transparency restricts competition. The focus is not on the idea of protecting data, but on how those rules were applied to developers who distribute their apps on iOS. This is where the underlying shock lies.
The origin of the function. App Tracking Transparency did not arise in this regulatory context, but several years earlier, as part of a broader change in Apple’s privacy strategy. The feature was introduced in April 2021 with the release of iOS 14.5 and was presented as a direct way to give control over ad tracking back to the user. From then on, each app had to ask for explicit permission before tracking user activity on other apps and websites. It was a turn that reordered the mobile ecosystem from within.
The logic behind App Tracking Transparency is based on a specific definition of what Apple considers tracking. It is not just about displaying ads, but about linking data collected in an app with information obtained from third-party services for targeted advertising or measurement. If the user chooses not to be tracked, the developer loses access to the IDFA and, according to the system rules, cannot use other personal identifiers for the same purpose. It is a technical cut that simplifies the user’s decision, but has direct consequences on how many applications are monetized.
A position of strength in the iOS ecosystem. For the Italian authority, the key is not the subsequent opening of the system, but the situation that existed when ATT began to be applied. During that period, Apple concentrated control over the distribution of iOS apps and the rules that govern advertising tracking at the system level. From that dominant position, the regulator concludes, the company was able to set conditions that had a competitive impact. All of this, beyond the stated objective of protecting user privacy.
The App Tracking Transparency notice
The core of the reproach: “double consent.” The heart of the penalty is how ATT was applied to third-party developers. According to the Italian authority, the Apple screen required a first permit to be requested which, by itself, did not meet all the requirements of European data protection regulations. This forced developers to request a second additional consent for the same advertising purpose. That extra step, the regulator maintains, reduced the probability of acceptance and limited the collection and use of data necessary for personalized advertising.
The economic impact is one of the pillars of the file. By increasing the friction of obtaining consent, ATT limited the collection and linking of data used to measure and personalize ads. For the Italian authority, this harmed developers whose business is based on the sale of advertising space and also affected advertisers and intermediation platforms. In the summary of the case, the regulator adds that this design could generate benefits for Apple, both through higher commissions associated with App Store services and the growth of its advertising business.
Was there another way to do it? One of the keys to resolution is that the problem is not in the goal, but in the path. The Italian authority claims that Apple could have achieved the same level of privacy protection without requiring duplicate consent requests.
Disagreement and notice of appeal. Apple has expressed its disagreement with the resolution of the Italian authority and considers that it does not adequately value the privacy protections provided by ATT. In a statement cited by Reuters, the company insists that the system was created to give users clear control over advertising tracking and that its rules apply equally to all developers. The company has also confirmed that it will appeal the fine and that it will maintain its commitment to protecting user privacy.
The fine is the result of a long and complex investigation. According to the case summary, the Italian authority opened the file in May 2023 and expanded its scope in October 2024, in coordination with the European Commission, other competition regulators and the national data protection authority. This joint approach underlines that ATT’s analysis was not limited to a single country or a single dimension. Rather, it was approached as a intersection between competition, privacy and the functioning of the digital market.
Beyond the announced appeal, the resolution imposes immediate effects. The authority orders Apple to immediately cease the aforementioned conduct and refrain from repeating similar practices in the future. In addition, Apple has 90 days to inform the AGCM how it will comply with those demands. It is not clear, for now, whether this calendar also depends on the appeal process, but the case makes it clear that the debate is no longer just theoretical.
Images | Georgiy Lyamin | Screenshot
In WorldOfSoftware | We believed that Microsoft had already put Copilot everywhere. LG shows us that we were very wrong
