There’s a word that Apple has used as a shield in recent years: privacy. A reassuring, almost ecological promise in the digital world, made of choices “for the good of users”. But what happens when that protection, instead of protecting, crushes those who live and work in the app ecosystem? This is the question answered by the Italian Antitrust, inflicting ad Apple a maxi fine of over 98 million euros for abuse of a dominant position.
A decision that not only speaks of competition, but also touches on issues dear to those who follow GreenMe: balance, responsibility, power and consequences of the choices of big tech.
Behind the App Store, a dominant position
Apple controls an obligatory step: theApp Storethe only gateway for those who want to reach iPhone and iPad users. In this market, the Competition and Market Guarantor Authority has established, the Cupertino company enjoys a position of absolute dominance. Not a technical nuance, but a structural fact: if you are a developer and work on iOS, you have to go from there.
And it is precisely from this position that, starting from 2021, Apple has imposed its own App Tracking Transparency (ATT)the famous window that appears on the screen and asks for consent to data tracking. A message that we have all seen at least once and that we have often closed in a hurry.
The problem is not asking for consent. The problem is as. According to the Antitrust, the ATT system forces third-party developers to do something paradoxical: ask for the same consent twice. The screen set by Apple, in fact, is not sufficient to fully comply with privacy legislation. Developers must support a second request, creating a domino effect that tires users and drastically reduces the “yes”.
And here the picture broadens. Less consensus means less dataless data means less effective advertisingand therefore less revenue for those who live on ads. A hard blow especially for small developers, for digital startups, for those trying to stay on the market without the broad shoulders of multinationals.
Privacy yes, but at what price?
The Antitrust is clear on one point: no one questions the importance of privacy. On the contrary. But the protection of personal data cannot become a pretext for imposing rules heavier than necessaryespecially if there are alternative solutions that are less harmful to competition.
According to the Authority, Apple could have guaranteed the same level of protection by allowing developers to collect consent in a single solutionavoiding the duplication that today penalizes the entire mobile advertising ecosystem.
And while others are tightening their belts, Apple – highlights the provision – continues to benefit economically: more commissions on the App Store and a growth of its advertising services, not subject to the same rigidities imposed on third parties.
The fine from 98.6 million eurosdecided on December 22, 2025it’s not just a sanction. It’s a message. He says that even in digital, as in the environment, the choices of the big players have a systemic impact. When power is concentrated too much, the risk is to stifle diversity, innovation and the possibility of alternatives.
And perhaps the real question, for us users, is another: Do we really want a fairer digital world just in words, or are we ready to hold the tech giants accountable too?
