EU Orders Google to Give Rival AI Apps the Same Android Access as Gemini

[pelowj]

The European Commission rejected both proposals. According to Apple, the Commission did not accept any of the solutions put forward over several months and did not offer alternatives.

They rejected them because it would have created a two-tier system: first-class access for Apple's own Siri, and whatever Apple chose to afford third parties. That is the definition of anti-competitive behaviour. To be clear, the Commission was happy to accept the Trusted System Agent as long as Apple's own Siri had to route through it too.

 

[LFO8]

Unpopular opinion: The EU is actually fighting a proxy war for all of us


I see a lot of people here pouring buckets of hate on the EU, but if you step back and look at the macroeconomics, the regulators are actually spot on.


Let’s be real for a second: Apple and Google’s "privacy and security" defense is largely a smokescreen. The actual problem isn't that they can't build a secure, sandboxed API layer for third-party AI to access device features. The problem is what happens if they do. If they cave in the EU and prove that a secure, interoperable API is technically possible, regulators in the US and Asia will instantly demand the exact same thing. They are stalling in Europe simply to protect their Walled Garden and global monopoly for as long as possible.


But it’s a risky game to play. Europe accounts for roughly 25% of Apple's global revenue. You can't expect users to pay 100% of the premium price for an artificially crippled device. Personally, I have an iPhone 16 Pro and a 16 Pro Max, and I’m perfectly fine sitting out the next 2-3 upgrade cycles until this resolves. I’m not in the vanguard here—there is a massive crowd of professionals and tech-aware users doing exactly the same thing. Good luck to the shareholders waiting for that massive hardware "supercycle" when a quarter of the market refuses to upgrade.


Ultimately, whatever the EU manages to force out of Apple and Google in this dispute will eventually benefit other markets globally. We've seen this exact "Brussels effect" happen before in other disputes over digital markets, streaming, and standardization. The EU is basically taking the first punch, but the resulting interoperability will eventually become the global standard.

Fair points.

 

[LFO8]

Apple want to build exactly that. The trouble is the EU rejected apples proposal.

Apple did not simply withdraw from the EU market. Over the months before WWDC, the company put forward multiple technical architectures intended to resolve the interoperability problem without, in its view, turning every iPhone into an open-access system for any AI provider.

The most developed was a framework called the Trusted System Agent — a software intermediary that would broker third-party assistants' access to the same iPhone capabilities Siri AI uses. Instead of giving rival AI systems a direct connection to messages, files, and app controls, the Trusted System Agent would have acted as a gatekeeper, mediating access, enforcing user consent flows, and limiting what any single assistant could do autonomously. Apple also proposed a phased rollout: launch Siri AI for EU users immediately, then gradually deploy the Trusted System Agent over 18 months so competing assistants could reach the same capability level safely.

The European Commission rejected both proposals. According to Apple, the Commission did not accept any of the solutions put forward over several months and did not offer alternatives. Apple's statement characterized the Commission's position as requiring that any AI system receive "nearly unlimited access" to a user's device — including the ability to read and send messages, make purchases, access files, and execute actions across any installed app, without requiring ongoing user consent or visibility. The Commission has not issued a public statement in direct response to the WWDC announcement as of June 9, 2026, and a spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment outside business hours on June 8.

Also, fair points.

And so the table tennis match between the EU and the mega corps. continues.

 

[azentropy]

In other news McDonals must now allow Burger King to serve Whoppers in their restaurants. Oh and of course without charging Burger King.

 

[omenatarhuri]

Two things can be true at once. This is also why EU should be investing in homegrown technology so there can be a fully developed option (EU third party mobile OS) with EU users in mind…. But we know that’s not their goal.

EU should not be investing in anything. It's an administrative layer. If they are investing something, they collected that many in one way or the other from EU citizens. Let the people keep their moneys and free market will spur innovations.

 

[Ad47uk]

In other news McDonals must now allow Burger King to serve Whoppers in their restaurants. Oh and of course without charging Burger King.

Not really the same thing, The mucky D here is across the road from Burger King, I can go into either to get what ever I want, not that I would.
If I buy a phone considering that we have two chocies in the smartphone market, Android(Google) and IOS (Apple), I should be stuck with running what they want me to run on it. The same with computers.
That is one thing that do annoy me about phones and comp;utyers, software or apps that can't be uninstalled or it takes ages and mucking around to get other things on it.
This is nothing to with privacy or security, no matter what Apple, Microsoft or Google says, it is about trying to force you to use their services and eventually charge you for doing so. That is why they prefer you not to install any other services on their devices or OS.


The reason I went for a Mac after years with Windows is that I seem to have more control over stuff on my Mac than I did with Windows. Not being forced to have a online account for one, Ai when it came was easy to disable, not like Windows.

 

[one more]

The Commission has not issued a public statement in direct response to the WWDC announcement as of June 9, 2026, and a spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment outside business hours on June 8.

The EC did issue this statement on 9 June, though:

 

[Ad47uk]

EU should not be investing in anything. It's an administrative layer. If they are investing something, they collected that many in one way or the other from EU citizens. Let the people keep their moneys and free market will spur innovations.

Think of it as a united states of Europe, the E.U is the government of all the countries that are in it. That is why I voted for our country to get out.
Fed up with them telling us what we can and can not do.

 

[mrochester]

They rejected them because it would have created a two-tier system: first-class access for Apple's own Siri, and whatever Apple chose to afford third parties. That is the definition of anti-competitive behaviour. To be clear, the Commission was happy to accept the Trusted System Agent as long as Apple's own Siri had to route through it too.

Let’s make everyone’s products worse so no one can have good things!

 

[tonmischa]

Google and Apple should both pull out of the EU.

F*ck em, they can have their weird bizarre Linux phones. Go use a Jolla phone and leave the first world alone with our iOS and Android products.

If a European can't innovate and has to buy an American product, they should accept that we built it a certain way. If they don't like it -- build one themselves.

Luckily it does not work that way.

You want to sell on my turf? You WILL play by my rules.
Otherwise we will make you pay.

US is treating foreign companies the exact same way. Why should EU behave any different?

 

[mjs916]

A better way to describe the situation might be self-preferencing.

https://uslawexplained.com/self-preferencing

So what Microsoft did by including IE? Consumers already know how to download AI apps.

No, you can just use the apple standard Siri /AI, or no AI at all, just like apple gives you now. But Apple wouldn’t be allowed to keep every other AI out. Apple can set standards, they still can set rules, but not blanket deny access to all.
It would be much like the Apple App Store. I’m allowed to use apps not from Apple Store, but I choose not too.

Once the EU forces Apple to give these other companies access to user data who is responsible for the misuse of that data?

It’s like they are being punished for trying to implement this in a safer way. I can see the argument for the App Store, but not AI implementation. They better not fine Apple for putting up full screen warnings and multiple barriers to enabling this.

 

[Arytonsenna]

Apple's "Shortcuts" App has been there for years with the ability to control other apps and respond immediately to events on the device. Why didn't the EU force them to open that up?

 

[turbineseaplane]

I think tobacco is a good analogy:

• Tobacco is clearly harmful for the user — sharing users private data with Meta or a similar player whose business is selling users profile to advertisers is clearly harmful to the user
• Tobacco can have irreversible consequences (lung cancer) — Leaking the data to a Chinese company will be once and done; the user cannot undo the harm
• Tobacco can have negative impact to society beyond the user (other taxpayers end up paying for users chemotherapy) — Leaking a sizeable share of EU population's private data to CCP controlled AI provider can have national security implications.

Getting population at large to understand downsides of tobacco took decades. And legally forcing vendors to cover half of the product with warnings.

I am afraid that:

• Legislation will do the opposite of requiring warnings. This time it is more likely to mandate no warnings due to them putting AI companies in competitive disadvantage.
• There will again need to be decades of harm to the population until the population learns the consequences.

I would add that, at least in the US, I wish we could ban the marketing of more things.
I really believe it has helped with Tobacco to not have that glorified and marketed all over.

The alcohol, pharmaceuticals, gambling ADs alone have become almost laughably pervasive.

My friends and I have a joke about TV AD breaks during American Football games.

"Here comes another drug, wager, drink and truck" AD break.
It's sad how often many of those, sometimes ALL, make it into a given 2.5 minute AD break.

 

[turbineseaplane]

LET THE USER DECIDE for gods sake. I’m from Germany and since the EU cancels us everything that’s fun, I guess in a short period of time we move so much backwards that we start using horses and carriages again

This is quite hyperbolic.
Nothing is going to lead anyone back to "horses & carriages" again.

C'mon. 🤔

 

[I7guy]

I think google, like apple, now has to think twice about how it deploys it’s functionality.

 

[turbineseaplane]

This! 😍 But the majority of Americans won’t understand because they grew up in the society they did.

As an American, I promise you that a HUGE chunk of these issues is that so many Americans have no exposure to other societies, how they work or any truly objective perspective on what we have here, how we are forced to live and all the things we are actually subjected to and just accept as "normal".

It's always amazing to me to see how many of my friends and family go on endless European vacations to beautiful walkable cities, have an amazing time and wax poetically about the infrastructure, design, food, feel & vibe ...

... and then return home to sit in their personal military tank, in traffic on a stroad on their way to a Starbucks drive thru to plod along at a job and life experience they barely enjoy at all.

 

[koil]

Allowing AI companies, of all possible types, access to your phone data and context simply does not sound like a good idea in this exact unwavering stance the EU is taking here.

But they don't just "get access" man, its your choice to give them access... the EU are just saying if Google are allowed to provide AI integrations using their agent, then because they are a gatekeeper through Android they must allow competitors to be able to build competitor products.

Same with the iPhone and Siri AI.

It gives you as the device owner control over who you want to give access to your data to. It could technically be a self-hosted open source agent even, the only thing mandated is the data-access APIs can't be vendor-locked.

I fail to see how this can be a negative thing.

 

[mrochester]

But they don't just "get access" man, its your choice to give them access... the EU are just saying if Google are allowed to provide AI integrations using their agent, then because they are a gatekeeper through Android they must allow competitors to be able to build competitor products.

Same with the iPhone and Siri AI.

It gives you as the device owner control over who you want to give access to your data to. It could technically be a self-hosted open source agent even, the only thing mandated is the data-access APIs can't be vendor-locked.

I fail to see how this can be a negative thing.

How do consumers make an accurate assessment as to who to give their data to?

 

[Xiao_Xi]

How do consumers make an accurate assessment as to who to give their data to?

With certifications, like physical products.

 

[surferfb]

But they don't just "get access" man, its your choice to give them access... the EU are just saying if Google are allowed to provide AI integrations using their agent, then because they are a gatekeeper through Android they must allow competitors to be able to build competitor products.

Same with the iPhone and Siri AI.

It gives you as the device owner control over who you want to give access to your data to. It could technically be a self-hosted open source agent even, the only thing mandated is the data-access APIs can't be vendor-locked.

I fail to see how this can be a negative thing.

I just fundamentally disagree that Apple/Google should be forced to enable functionality that they think is (and is) harmful for their customers and has a high likelihood of blowing back on Apple/Google when it inevitably does cause harm.

We’re talking about letting a third party have access to literally everything on the phone. Health data, encrypted messages, photos, location, phone calls, emails, etc. And the fact of the matter is that most consumers do not understand and aren’t going to understand that setting Grok as the default AI means that Grok gets to upload all that data to the cloud and do who knows what with it. And the EU won’t even let Apple warn users that’s the case because “it’s not neutral” to say Apple’s implementation is private and Grok’s isn’t, even if that is undeniably true.

Then, when users start getting targeted ads based off of their end-to-end encrypted Messages, they’re not going to think “Grok is selling my data” - they’re going to think “Apple lied about iOS keeping my data private.”

Apple even outlined a way to move forward, one that would cost them more than all other DMA compliance to date combined, and the EU rejected it out of hand.

The problem with the DMA is that it assumes all gatekeepers are bad actors, all developers are good actors, and all users understand technology and the privacy tradeoffs. I think all three of those assumptions are laughably wrong.

 

[turbineseaplane]

We’re talking about letting a third party have access to literally everything on the phone. Health data, encrypted messages, photos, location, phone calls, emails, etc. And the fact of the matter is that most consumers do not understand and aren’t going to understand that setting Grok as the default AI means that Grok gets to upload all that data to the cloud and do who knows what with it. And the EU won’t even let Apple warn users that’s the case because “it’s not neutral” to say Apple’s implementation is private and Grok’s isn’t, even if that is undeniably true.

That part in bold is what I'd like to see changed, and then let users do as they'd prefer.

I'm just not convinced it's overall desirable to have companies (any company, not just Apple) deciding for users how their own data is opened up or not.

 

[tonmischa]

You do understand that you are paying for your health care from your salary right?

Who says I am getting a salary?
But you are correct. I was trying to make a joke about Google‘s fines going into the EU budgets.
I admit, this particular post of mine is pretty lame.

 

[surferfb]

That part in bold is what I'd like to see changed, and then let users do as they'd prefer.

I'm just not convinced it's overall desirable to have companies (any company, not just Apple) deciding for users how their own data is opened up or not.

I get that - there are definitely real drawbacks to my preferred approach - if there was an easy answer we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

I actually think Apple’s proposed path forward (as I understand it) presented to the EU was a good compromise. It’s a shame the EU rejected it out of hand.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I get that - there are definitely real drawbacks to my preferred approach - if there was an easy answer we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

I actually think Apple’s proposed path forward (as I understand it) presented to the EU was a good compromise. It’s a shame the EU rejected it out of hand.

I'm glad all this keeps cropping up and getting talked about.

I realize people tire of the EU. Nobody really likes the itch that keeps needing a scratch.

Someone has to be bringing a lot of this up, as the "wild West" approach of the US basically just leaves users as the victims. Even if we think a market situation can fully solve for data control and privacy situations (which I do not), the users get taken for a ride before any corrective actions ever occur (if they even do at all).

It's a really tough balance to strike, but we are in the age of data, which is never going away, so we better all keep hashing it out.

This is also why I find retorts on topics like this such as "Go away EU!" to be counterproductive.

 

[mrochester]

With certifications, like physical products.

Who is going to verify these products ?