Open App Markets Act Forces Apple/Google to Allow Third-Party Payment Systems and App Stores

The Open App Markets Act is designed to shake up how you get apps on your phone and tablet. It specifically targets major technology companies—the ones that control both a large app store (used by 50 million+ Americans monthly) and the underlying operating system, like iOS or Android. The core of this bill is simple: these "covered companies" can no longer force app developers to use their proprietary payment systems or their official app store as the only way to reach users. This change kicks in 180 days after the bill becomes law (SEC. 9).

Breaking Up the Payment Monopoly

For years, developers have complained about the mandatory 15% to 30% cut that app store owners take from every in-app purchase. This bill aims to stop that by banning covered companies from forcing developers to use their in-app payment system just to get listed (SEC. 3). What does that mean for you? If you’re playing a game and want to buy a new skin or a subscription, the developer could route that payment through a third-party service like PayPal or Stripe. Because developers would no longer have to pay the massive app store fee, this could potentially lead to lower prices for digital goods and subscriptions, or at least shift more revenue back to the people building the apps we use every day.

The bill also prevents these companies from using "most-favored-nation" clauses—meaning they can’t demand that a developer offer the lowest price on their platform compared to what the developer offers elsewhere. If a developer wants to sell their app for less on their own website or a competing app store, they can (SEC. 3).

Your Phone, Your Rules: Side-Loading and Defaults

One of the biggest changes for users is the mandate for increased choice. Covered companies must now allow users to install apps and entire app stores from sources other than the company’s official store (often called "side-loading"). Furthermore, you must be able to set third-party apps—say, a different web browser or map service—as your default option, and you must be able to hide or uninstall pre-installed apps that came with your phone (SEC. 3). This is huge for competition; it means alternatives can compete directly without being penalized by the platform owner. For the average user, this means more freedom to customize your device and potentially access apps that the main store might have rejected.

But there’s a catch for users who choose to exercise this freedom. The law explicitly states that covered companies are not required to provide service or support for damage caused by apps installed through these alternative, third-party means (SEC. 7). So, if you install a sketchy app from a side-loaded store and it messes up your phone, you might be out of luck for warranty coverage related to that specific issue.

The Developer Data Firewall

Another key provision establishes a firewall around developer data. Covered companies are prohibited from using the nonpublic business information they collect from third-party apps—like sales trends or user engagement metrics—to give their own competing apps an unfair advantage (SEC. 3). This is meant to stop a platform owner from seeing that a small developer’s niche weather app is crushing it, then immediately launching their own, favored version of that app using the competitor’s secret data. The bill also requires that search results within the app store cannot unfairly favor the platform owner’s own apps unless they are clearly labeled as advertising (SEC. 3).

Security vs. Competition: The Big Exception

While the bill is pro-competition, it includes a major exception: covered companies can still take action to protect user privacy, security, or prevent fraud (SEC. 4). This means they aren't completely defenseless against bad actors. However, to use this exception, their security action must be applied consistently to their own apps and third-party apps, and it must be “narrowly tailored.” In other words, they can't use “security” as an excuse to block a competitor if a less drastic measure would have worked. This provision is where the rubber meets the road, as we can expect covered companies to lean heavily on the security argument, forcing the courts to decide if their actions are truly necessary or just anti-competitive.

Enforcement and the Foreign State Carve-Out

The law is backed by serious enforcement power. The FTC, the Department of Justice, and State Attorneys General can sue companies that violate the Act (SEC. 5). More importantly, developers who are harmed by a violation can sue in federal court and, if they win, collect triple the actual damages they suffered, plus legal costs. This provision of treble damages is a powerful deterrent.

However, there is a specific and unequal application of this right: developers whose apps are owned or controlled by a foreign state are explicitly barred from bringing these private lawsuits for damages or injunctions (SEC. 5). While this appears aimed at foreign adversaries, it creates a two-tiered system of rights where some developers are protected by the threat of private litigation while others are not.