In 2024, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) will be given more powers and direct responsibility for antitrust decisions relating to large tech companies operating in the UK regulatory space.
After receiving new powers, the CMA announced that it would launch a series of investigations into major US technology companies as soon as possible.
Although it has not named any specific entities, the CMA said it will launch three to four investigations in 2024. It will develop a set of parameters for the “strategic market status” (SMS) of companies with significant digital market share.
Companies labeled as SMS will be subject to proprietary disclosure requirements and technical capabilities that third parties do not have.
The CMA has vowed to take tough action against platforms that are 'exploiting monopolistic markets' - likely a reference to the App Store - stressing that the interests of consumers will be the priority rather than those of market players.
The CMA’s powers have been limited and have been challenged in court by tech giants, including a battle with Apple over its cloud gaming and browser markets.
So, Apple is going to have a tough time defending its cloud gaming policy going forward, as Apple currently maintains a policy that prohibits cloud customers from being able to launch games from a single category that is included in the App Store.
Instead, the App Store requires each cloud game to be published as a standalone app, going through its own verification process. According to Apple, cloud gaming in a single folder poses “security and privacy risks.”
However, manufacturers have objected, arguing that releasing standalone game apps on cloud platforms is unreasonably increasing barriers to service access and production costs.
(according to Appleinsider)
Notorious French hacker who stole personal information sentenced in US
McAfee launches anti-deepfake tool
YouTube adds new rules to combat online violence
Meta strengthens policies to protect teenagers on social networks
Google faces new $7 billion patent infringement lawsuit
Source
Comment (0)