In connection with an antitrust investigation in India, Apple has effectively prevented Match Group, the owner of Tinder, and a number of Indian startups from gaining access to commercially sensitive data. This development coincides with the Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) ongoing inquiry into Apple’s purported anti-competitive behavior. Despite the conclusion of the investigation, the senior members of the CCI have not yet rendered a decision that could lead to penalties or modifications to the internet giant’s policies.
Credits: Reuters
A little-known non-profit organization called Together We Fight Society filed the lawsuit against Apple, claiming that the company’s in-app fee structure, which charges up to 30% on transactions, hampered competition and raised costs for both app developers and users. In response to the allegation, the CCI began a thorough inquiry into Apple’s business operations to see whether the corporation had misused its position of dominance in the iOS app market.
Apple maintains that it is still a minor player in India, where Google’s Android dominates the market, and has continuously denied any wrongdoing. As of 2024, only around 4% of India’s 712 million cellphones run on iOS, with Android controlling the majority, according to Counterpoint Research. However, during the last five years, Apple’s smartphone base has increased fivefold, indicating a huge increase in its footprint in India.
Match Group and the Alliance of Digital India Foundation (ADIF), a consortium of Indian startups, sought access to specific confidential information from the investigation report. They argued that Apple’s excessive redactions limited their ability to scrutinize its practices effectively. Match has previously accused Apple of similar tactics in global antitrust cases, claiming that the company uses redactions to hinder accountability.
Despite these arguments, the CCI ruled in Apple’s favor on March 3, stating that the disclosure of sensitive financial data—including developer payouts and billing details—was neither necessary nor beneficial at this stage of the proceedings. The order further emphasized that revealing such data could harm Apple’s competitive standing, particularly given Match’s involvement in similar cases worldwide.
Apple’s attempt to defend its business model in India depends on the CCI’s ruling. Apple might have come under more scrutiny if it had been compelled to divulge its private information, not only in India but also in other countries where it is facing comparable accusations.
This decision is a blow to Match and ADIF’s attempts to make Apple’s app store policies more transparent. Their main contention is that, like Google’s in-app pricing scheme, which the CCI earlier rejected in 2022, Apple’s commission structure unjustly restricts competition. In that instance, Match and ADIF probably believed that Google’s $113 million punishment and decision to permit third-party charging systems would establish a precedent for Apple’s case.
While Apple has successfully defended its confidentiality for now, the larger battle is far from over. The CCI’s senior members are expected to deliver a final ruling in the coming weeks, which could result in penalties or policy changes for Apple’s App Store operations in India.
Apple may have to amend its in-app payment regulations, possibly permitting other payment methods and lowering commissions, if the CCI decides against the business in the end. These adjustments might have an impact on the entire app store ecosystem worldwide. On the other side, if Apple is unharmed, it will be better able to defend itself against similar cases around the world and maintain control over the income model of its platform.
Credits: CNBC TV 18
This issue is important for Indian entrepreneurs because it represents the larger fight against the dominance of large tech companies in online marketplaces. High commission rates, according to many app developers, stifle creativity and hinder their ability to expand. Startups may find it more challenging to advocate for regulatory actions in the future if the court rules in favor of Apple.
All eyes are on India as the CCI approaches its final ruling to see if it would join European and other authorities who have taken a firm stand against Apple’s App Store policy. Whatever the verdict, this case highlights the increased regulatory scrutiny of large IT companies in India, a quickly rising digital economy.
In one of the biggest and fastest-growing digital marketplaces in the world, Apple’s legal spat with Indian regulators may establish a significant precedent for how multinational tech companies conduct their business. The verdict will have long-term effects for developers, customers, and regulatory agencies alike, regardless of whether Apple is compelled to alter its practices or is able to preserve the status quo.
