Mirror Review
September 26, 2025
Apple’s fight with European regulators has entered uncharted territory.
This week, the company called for a repeal of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a sweeping EU law designed to rein in Big Tech’s gatekeeping power.
At first glance, it looks like a corporate tantrum over lost profits. But Apple insists the real issue is deeper: user privacy and security.
“Some of the DMA’s provisions would force us to weaken the privacy and security protections that our users rely on,” Apple warned in its official statement. “We believe these rules put consumers at risk.”
That argument reframes the Apple vs EU fight.
Instead of just being about competition, Apple is pitching the battle as a global referendum on who should set the rules for data protection.
Should it be governments or the companies that design the platforms billions of people use every day?
Competition vs Privacy: Two Narratives Collide
The EU sees the DMA as a pro-competition law.
It requires “gatekeepers” like Apple, Google, and Meta to allow rival services onto their platforms, prevent self-preferencing, and improve interoperability.
For Apple, this means opening iOS to sideloaded apps, alternative app stores, and competing payment systems.
From Brussels’ point of view, this is about fairness. “The DMA ensures that consumers have real choice, and developers can compete on a level playing field,” Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition chief, said when the law took effect.
Apple counters that this isn’t about fairness at all; it’s about safety.
Craig Federighi, Apple’s senior vice president of software engineering, has previously said: “Sideloading is a cybercriminal’s best friend. Requiring it undercuts the security protections we’ve built.”
These two perspectives of competition vs privacy are on a collision course. And the outcome won’t stay confined to Europe.
Europe as the Rule-Setter
For over a decade, Europe has written digital rules that spread far beyond its borders.
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), implemented in 2018, reshaped how companies worldwide handle user data.
Even US and Asian firms adjusted to comply, because the EU’s market was too big to ignore.
The DMA could play a similar role. If Brussels enforces its rules, they may become a global template for platform openness.
But if Apple successfully reframes the law as a privacy threat, the opposite may happen: a security-first model, set by corporations themselves, could take root instead.
That’s the real significance of this fight. It’s not just about Apple. It’s about whether governments or companies will set the future rules of user data.
What’s Really at Stake
- The user-data paradox
More openness creates more competition, but it also creates more entry points for bad actors. Apple’s closed system has historically limited malware compared to Android. Regulators say competition drives innovation. Apple says openness endangers trust.
- Corporate vs state authority
Should privacy protections come from elected regulators, or from Apple’s engineers? Apple argues that its ecosystem is designed around user trust. The EU argues that one company shouldn’t have the power to dictate rules for millions of developers and hundreds of millions of users.
- A precedent for the world
Just as GDPR became the global standard for consent and data handling, this case could define the next frontier: security in open ecosystems. The balance between user choice and user safety could be rewritten on Europe’s stage.
The €500 Million Pressure Point
Earlier this year, the European Commission fined Apple €500 million for breaching DMA rules that blocked developers from steering customers to cheaper payment options outside its App Store.
Apple has appealed the fine, but the pressure is mounting.
The company has already delayed or disabled features in Europe, like Live Translation for AirPods and iPhone Mirroring, citing compliance challenges.
Critics argue this is a form of regulatory blackmail. Apple insists it’s unavoidable.
“If Brussels holds the line, Apple may have no choice but to regionalize its features,” says Ben Thompson, a tech analyst. “That fractures the user experience and sets up two different versions of the iPhone: one for Europe, one for the rest of the world.”
Why This Could Reframe Privacy Globally
GDPR reshaped the world by setting rules for data collection and consent. The Apple vs EU case could become the defining moment for data security standards.
- If Brussels wins, governments take the lead in defining privacy in open markets.
- If Apple wins carve-outs, privacy becomes a corporate standard — companies dictate what “safe” means.
- Either way, the global balance of digital power shifts.
As Marietje Schaake, former Member of the European Parliament, put it: “We’re watching a contest of sovereignty — is it democratic institutions, or global corporations, that govern our digital lives?”
The Bigger Picture
At its core, this isn’t just about the iPhone or app stores. It’s about the future of trust in digital systems.
Do users place their faith in governments to regulate fairly, or in Apple’s engineers to protect them?
For consumers, the difference will show up in small but important ways — the apps they can download, the prices they pay, and the level of risk they accept.
For policymakers, the stakes are much higher: whether Europe continues to act as the world’s regulatory compass, or whether Big Tech rewrites the map.
The Bottom Line
The Apple vs EU antitrust battle is the next great debate about user data.
If GDPR sets the rules for how data is collected, this case could set the rules for how data is protected in an era of open ecosystems.
The outcome will decide not just how iPhones work in Europe, but how billions of people worldwide experience privacy, choice, and security in the digital age.
