Apple is likely to be at odds with the European Union again after the bloc released a new draft Digital Markets Act (DMA) that suggests it will allow rivals access to proprietary technologies, including AirDrop and AirPlay.

In a document [PDF] for public consultation, the EU stated its claim that Apple needs to implement “effective interoperability” in many iOS-only features, including iOS notifications, background execution, and automatic audio switching. However, the biggest headache for Apple will be consumer features related to data transfer.

AirDrop (a way to move files wirelessly between Apple devices) and AirPlay (a way to wirelessly stream audio and video content to compatible TVs, set-top boxes, and other devices) are both very easy to use easy to use and are strong selling points that keep people firmly in the Apple ecosystem.

For example, if you bought the best soundbar because it had the familiar AirPlay logo on the box, you would probably want to keep buying an iPhone.

That, of course, is exactly why the European Union is paying attention to this. The reasoning is that such proprietary technology is not competitive and gives Apple and its iPhone an unfair advantage over Android. If the law is amended, there could theoretically be Android devices with AirDrop and AirPlay buttons, which would give users less reason to stick with Apple in the future.

But Apple is not taking this lying down, and has already issued its first rebuttal, a five-page document [PDF] claiming that the changes would require users to “expose their devices and their most sensitive data to companies with a track record of privacy violations

The document also states.

Ironically, in response to the document titled “It's getting personal,” the company names one particular company: meta.

“No company has made more interoperability requests to Apple than Meta,” the document states, claiming that the company is overstepping its actual needs and “attempting to change features in a way that raises concerns about user privacy and security.” Meta, claims that it is requesting access to AirPlay, App Intents, CarPlay, Continuity Camera, iPhone Mirroring, Messaging, and at least four other technologies.

Apple continues: “If Apple had to grant all of these requests, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp would not be able to read all messages and emails on a user's device by Meta, see all of a user's phone calls, , track all of a user's apps, scan all of a user's photos, see all of a user's files and calendar events, and record all of a user's passwords. 17]

“This is Apple's own way of providing users with the strongest possible data that it chooses not to access in order to provide protection”

.

Apple's quick response is instructive. The company knows that the EU is one of the few organizations with the power to force companies to change their business practices. Unlike individual governments, its decisions are ultimately made by representatives of the 27 member states, making effective lobbying extremely difficult.

Media mogul Rupert Murdoch was once reportedly asked to explain his antipathy to the bloc. 'It's simple,' the Fox owner is said to have replied. 'When I go to Downing Street, they listen to me. That has been Apple's recent experience. They cannot go against past EU decisions.'

That's why Apple complained repeatedly about forcing USB-C on users and allowing third-party app stores, but eventually conceded to both. In the latter case, this is only within the EU, and it is not certain whether Apple will try to maintain theoretical third-party AirPlay and AirDrop compatibility.

However, Apple has a stronger possible defense than it did with USB-C, and highlighting the privacy implications may get a more sympathetic opinion from EU decision makers.

After all, privacy is believed to be the reason Meta's Threads was not launched in the EU in July 2023, and if Apple can argue that anti-competitive laws may have unintended consequences for user protection, the laws could be diluted or waived entirely.

It is a matter of skin deep.

It could be seen as a cynical ploy: Apple undoubtedly benefits from proprietary technology that works well and keeps people buying its products. [However, the privacy point is still a good one. Unlike USB-C, which was a fairly straightforward win for consumers, the pros and cons of forcing Apple to open up its technology to other companies are less clear.