Open App Markets Act

Bill Number

S. 2153

Origin Chamber

Senate

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Commerce

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-06-24: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2025-07-21T19:32:26Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The Open App Markets Act aims to promote competition in the app economy by limiting the control that large tech companies (referred to as "covered companies") have over app distribution, payments, and user choices. It seeks to give consumers more options, improve app quality, and lower costs by reducing barriers for third-party developers and alternative app stores.

Key Provisions

• Definitions (Section 2): Establishes terms like "app" (software run on devices like phones or computers), "app store" (platforms distributing apps), "covered company" (entities controlling app stores with over 50 million U.S. users monthly and the underlying operating system, such as iOS or Android), "developer" (app or store owners), "in-app payment system" (tools for billing within apps), and "nonpublic business information" (private data from apps collected by covered companies).

• Protecting Competition (Section 3):
• Prohibits covered companies from forcing developers to use their own or partnered payment systems for app distribution.
• Bans requirements that developers offer the same or better pricing on the covered company's app store compared to others.
• Prevents punishment of developers for using alternative payments, stores, or offering access to other apps via remote services (not downloads).
• Allows developers to communicate business offers (e.g., pricing) directly with users, with user consent required for data sharing.
• Forbids covered companies from using private data from third-party apps to compete against them.
• Requires operating systems to support third-party apps/stores as defaults, alternative installation methods, and the ability to hide or delete preinstalled apps.
• Bans unfair favoring of a covered company's own apps in search results or rankings (disclosed ads are allowed).
• Mandates providing developers access to system interfaces, hardware/software features, and documentation on fair, timely terms.

• Security and Privacy Exceptions (Section 4): Covered companies can take actions otherwise prohibited if they are essential for user privacy/security, preventing spam/fraud, protecting intellectual property (IP, like copyrights or trademarks), or complying with law. These must be applied consistently to all apps, narrowly tailored (least discriminatory option), and certified under penalty of perjury to avoid pretextual exclusion of competitors. Examples include user opt-ins for third-party installs, removing malicious apps, verifying app origins, and limiting data access.

• Enforcement (Section 5):
• Enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), U.S. Attorney General, and state attorneys general using tools from antitrust laws (e.g., FTC Act, Sherman Act—laws promoting fair competition).
• FTC can file civil suits for penalties and relief.
• States can sue on behalf of residents.
• Injured developers can sue for triple damages, costs, attorney fees, interest (if justified), and injunctive relief (court orders to stop violations). Foreign state-owned apps cannot sue.

• Reporting (Section 6): Within three years, the FTC, Government Accountability Office (GAO—an independent agency auditing government), and DOJ Antitrust Division must separately analyze the law's effects on competition, innovation, market entry barriers, and market power concentration.

• Rule of Construction (Section 7): Clarifies the law does not limit existing antitrust powers, require warranties/customer service for third-party app damage, force IP licensing, or mandate sharing with sanctioned entities (e.g., those on U.S. export control lists or linked to foreign adversaries like China). It protects IP enforcement and allows actions against illegal activity.

• Severability (Section 8): If any part is ruled unconstitutional, the rest remains effective.

• Effective Date (Section 9): Takes effect 180 days after enactment.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This bill introduces new federal rules specifically targeting app stores and operating systems, building on but going beyond general antitrust laws (like the Sherman Act, which prohibits monopolistic practices). It explicitly bans practices currently common among large tech firms, such as mandatory in-app payments (e.g., Apple's 30% commission), self-preferencing in app rankings, and restrictions on sideloading (installing apps outside official stores). It adds developer private rights of action (ability to sue directly) with treble damages, similar to antitrust remedies, but tailored to digital markets. Exceptions for security/privacy require proof and certification, raising the bar for companies to justify restrictions.

Potential Impacts

• Government Agencies: Empowers the FTC, DOJ, and state attorneys general with expanded enforcement tools, potentially increasing investigations and litigation against big tech. Requires agencies to conduct impact reports, adding administrative workload.
• Citizens/Consumers: Likely increases app choices, reduces prices (by allowing alternative payments), and enhances customization (e.g., defaulting to third-party stores), but may introduce security risks if third-party apps are harder to vet.
• International Relations: Minimal direct impact, but limits lawsuits by foreign state-controlled developers and prohibits data sharing with sanctioned entities, potentially straining ties with countries like China while aligning with U.S. national security policies.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Covered Companies: Large tech firms (e.g., Apple, Google) controlling major app stores and OS, facing new compliance costs, potential fines, and reduced revenue from payments/search favoritism.
• Developers: Third-party app creators benefit from easier distribution, fairer terms, and direct user communication, but must navigate security opt-ins and IP rules.
• Consumers/Users: Gain more options and potentially lower costs/quality improvements, with added privacy controls but possible exposure to unvetted apps.
• Enforcement Bodies: FTC, DOJ, state AGs, and courts handle increased caseloads and private suits.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Strengthens antitrust enforcement in tech without altering core IP or warranty laws; the certification requirement under perjury (28 U.S.C. § 1746) deters misuse of exceptions. Parens patriae suits allow states to represent citizens collectively, broadening access to justice.
• Constitutional: Severability clause ensures the law's core survives partial court challenges (e.g., under free speech or due process claims). No direct First Amendment issues, as it targets business practices, not content.
• Political: Bipartisan sponsorship (e.g., Sens. Blackburn, Blumenthal) signals cross-party concern over big tech dominance, potentially influencing broader digital regulation debates without overriding state laws or existing federal authority.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]

Cosponsors (5)

Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT], Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT], Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN], Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL], Sen. Hawley, Josh [R-MO]

Recent Actions

• 2025-06-24: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2025-06-24: Introduced in Senate

Bill Versions

• Open App Markets Act — issued 2025-06-24 — PDF (15 pages)