2024-12-06 03:49:00
A few hours ago, we reported that Apple filed an appeal to Apple’s administrative process. General Superintendence do Administrative Council for Economic Defense (SG-Cade) do Brazil. In it, the company sought to suspend the application of a preventive measure which would force it to allow alternative payment methods in the App Store and release the sideloading no iOS. Then, according to the Economic ValueApple did it.
A Federal Court of the Federal District overturned the preventive measure imposed by Cade. According to the judge Eduardo Santos da Rocha Penteadoof the 14th Federal Civil Court, it was “disproportionate” and “unnecessary”. According to the article, Cade did not comment, but will appeal the decision.
The judge said the measures “change, in a sensitive and structural way, Apple’s business organization.”
The technical complexity of the changes and the global regulatory impacts of similar decisions in other countries, such as the European Union, reinforce the need for such changes to be discussed in greater depth.
The administrative process, it is worth remembering, was opened at the end of November — in response to a complaint from Mercado Livre — and provided for a daily fine of R$250,000 if Maçã did not make the necessary changes to the business model of its app store. According to Cade, the process aims to “investigate suspicions of abuse of a dominant position” and the practice of “tying” by Apple.
The determinations of the preventive measure — which has now been suspended — include two main points:
- Payment methods: Apple should allow developers as much inform your users about other payment methods (something currently prohibited on the App Store) and add links and buttons or integrate third-party payment platforms within the app itself.
- App Store: according to Cade’s determination, developers should be able to “choose distribute your applications native to iOS through other tools and mechanisms other than exclusively the Maçã store, in particular measures to enabling sideloading and inclusion of alternative native app stores.
Apparently, this soap opera is still far from over…
via 9to5Mac
1733480897
#Justice #overturns #Cades #preventive #measure #change #App #Store #Brazil
What are the potential implications for consumers in Brazil if Cade is successful in its appeal?
## Breaking News: Apple Wins Court Battle in Brazil
**INT. NEWS STUDIO – DAY**
**HOST:** Welcome back to the show. Just hours ago, a Brazilian federal court dealt a significant blow to the Brazilian antitrust watchdog, Cade. They overturned a measure that would have forced Apple to allow alternative payment methods in its App Store and enable sideloading on iOS devices.
Joining us to break down this development is tech legal expert **[GUEST NAME]**
**GUEST:** Thanks for having me.
**HOST:** So, what exactly does this ruling mean for Apple in Brazil?
**GUEST:** This is a major victory for Apple. The court found that Cade’s mandatory requirement for Apple to fundamentally change its business model in Brazil was “disproportionate” and “unnecessary” [[2]]. This essentially means Apple can continue operating its App Store in Brazil as it does globally for now.
**HOST:** But Cade is reportedly planning to appeal this decision.
**GUEST:** That’s right. This battle is far from over. If Cade succeeds in its appeal, this could be a major setback for Apple and could set a precedent for other countries looking to regulate app stores.
**HOST:** What are the implications for consumers in Brazil?
**GUEST:** Well, for now, Brazilian consumers continue to be restricted to using Apple’s payment system within the App Store and can’t download apps from sources outside the official store. However, if Cade eventually wins their case, it could mean more choice and potentially lower prices for app purchases in the future.
**HOST:** This case certainly highlights the ongoing global debate about app store regulations. What’s your take on the future of this issue?
**GUEST:** This is a complex issue with no easy answers. There are valid arguments on both sides. Regulators want to ensure a fair and competitive market, while companies like Apple argue that their ecosystem offers a secure and user-friendly experience. We’re likely to see more legal battles like this play out around the world as governments grapple with how to regulate the mobile app landscape.
**HOST:** Thank you for your insights, **[GUEST NAME]**. This is certainly a case to watch closely.
