App Store

iceblock-lawsuit:-trump-admin-bragged-about-demanding-app-store-removal

ICEBlock lawsuit: Trump admin bragged about demanding App Store removal


ICEBlock creator sues to protect apps that are crowd-sourcing ICE sightings.

In a lawsuit filed against top Trump administration officials on Monday, Apple was accused of caving to unconstitutional government demands by removing an Immigration and Customs Enforcement-spotting app from the App Store with more than a million users.

In his complaint, Joshua Aaron, creator of ICEBlock, cited a Fox News interview in which Attorney General Pam Bondi “made plain that the United States government used its regulatory power to coerce a private platform to suppress First Amendment-protected expression.”

Suing Bondi—along with Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Acting Director of ICE Todd Lyons, White House “Border Czar” Thomas D. Homan, and unnamed others—Aaron further alleged that US officials made false statements and “unlawful threats” to criminally investigate and prosecute him for developing ICEBlock.

Currently, ICEBlock is still available to anyone who downloaded the app prior to the October removal from the App Store, but updates have been disrupted, and Aaron wants the app restored. Seeking an injunction to block any attempted criminal investigations from chilling his free speech, as well as ICEBlock users’ speech, Aaron vowed in a statement provided to Ars to fight to get ICEBlock restored.

“I created ICEBlock to keep communities safe,” Aaron said. “Growing up in a Jewish household, I learned from history about the consequences of staying silent in the face of tyranny. I will never back down from resisting the Trump Administration’s targeting of immigrants and conscripting corporations into its unconstitutional agenda.”

Expert calls out Apple for “capitulation”

Apple is not a defendant in the lawsuit and did not respond to Ars’ request to comment.

Aaron’s complaint called out Apple, though, for alleged capitulation to the Trump administration that appeared to be “the first time in Apple’s nearly fifty-year history” that “Apple removed a US-based app in response to the US government’s demands.” One of his lawyers, Deirdre von Dornum, told Ars that the lawsuit is about more than just one app being targeted by the government.

“If we allow community sharing of information to be silenced, our democracy will fail,” von Dornum said. “The United States will be no different than China or Russia. We cannot stand by and allow that to happen. Every person has a right to share information under the First Amendment.”

Mario Trujillo, a staff attorney from a nonprofit digital rights group called the Electronic Frontier Foundation that’s not involved in the litigation, agreed that Apple’s ban appeared to be prompted by an unlawful government demand.

He told Ars that “there is a long history that shows documenting law enforcement performing their duties in public is protected First Amendment activity.” Aaron’s complaint pointed to a feature on one of Apple’s own products—Apple Maps—that lets users crowd-source sightings of police speed traps as one notable example. Other similar apps that Apple hosts in its App Store include other Big Tech offerings, like Google Maps and Waze, as well as apps with explicit names like Police Scanner.

Additionally, Trujillo noted that Aaron’s arguments are “backed by recent Supreme Court precedent.”

“The government acted unlawfully when it demanded Apple remove ICEBlock, while threatening others with prosecution,” Trujillo said. “While this case is rightfully only against the government, Apple should also take a hard look at its own capitulation.”

ICEBlock maker sues to stop app crackdown

ICEBlock is not the only app crowd-sourcing information on public ICE sightings to face an app store ban. Others, including an app simply collecting footage of ICE activities, have been removed by Apple and Google, 404 Media reported, as part of a broader crackdown.

Aaron’s suit is intended to end that crackdown by seeking a declaration that government demands to remove ICE-spotting apps violate the First Amendment.

“A lawsuit is the only mechanism that can bring transparency, accountability, and a binding judicial remedy when government officials cross constitutional lines,” Aaron told 404 Media. “If we don’t challenge this conduct in court, it will become a playbook for future censorship.”

In his complaint, Aaron explained that he created ICE in January to help communities hold the Trump administration accountable after Trump campaigned on a mass deportation scheme that boasted numbers far beyond the number of undocumented immigrants in the country.

“His campaign team often referenced plans to deport ’15 to 20 million’ undocumented immigrants, when in fact the number of undocumented persons in the United States is far lower,” his complaint said.

The app was not immediately approved by Apple, Aaron said. But after a thorough vetting process, Apple approved the app in April.

ICEBlock wasn’t an overnight hit but suddenly garnered hundreds of thousands of users after CNN profiled the app in June.

Trump officials attack ICEBlock with false claims

Within hours of that report, US officials began blasting the app, claiming that it was used to incite violence against ICE officers and amplifying pressure to get the app yanked from the App Store.

But Bondi may have slipped up by making comments that seemed to make it clear her intentions were to restrict disfavored speech. On Fox, Bondi claimed that CNN’s report supposedly promoting the app was dangerous, whereas the Fox News report was warning people not to use the app and was perfectly OK.

“Bondi’s statements make clear that her threats of adverse action constitute viewpoint discrimination, where speech ‘promoting’ the app is unlawful but speech ‘warning’ about the app is lawful,” the lawsuit said.

Other Trump officials were accused of making false statements and using unlawful threats to silence Aaron and ICEBlock users.

“What they’re doing is actively encouraging people to avoid law enforcement activities, operations, and we’re going to actually go after them,” Noem told reporters in July. In a statement, Lyons claimed that ICEBlock “basically paints a target on federal law enforcement officers’ backs” and that “officers and agents are already facing a 500 percent increase in assaults.” Echoing Lyons and Noem, Homan called for an investigation into CNN for reporting on the app, which “falsely implied that Plaintiffs’ protected speech was illegally endangering law enforcement officers,” Aaron alleged.

Not named in the lawsuit, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt also allegedly made misleading statements. That included falsely claiming “that ICEBlock and similar apps are responsible for violent attacks on law enforcement officers, such as the tragic shooting of immigrants at an ICE detention facility in Dallas, Texas, on September 24, 2025,” where “no actual evidence has ever been cited to support these claims,” the lawsuit said.

Despite an apparent lack of evidence, Apple confirmed that ICEBlock was removed in October, “based on information we’ve received from law enforcement about the safety risks associated with ICEBlock,” a public statement said. In a notice to Aaron, Apple further explained that the app was banned “because its purpose is to provide location information about law enforcement officers that can be used to harm such officers individually or as a group.”

Apple never shared any more information with Aaron to distinguish his app from other apps allowed in the App Store that help people detect and avoid nearby law enforcement activities. The iPhone maker also didn’t confirm the source of its information, Aaron said.

However, on Fox, Bondi boasted about reaching “out to Apple today demanding they remove the ICEBlock app from their App Store—and Apple did so.”

Then, later during sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, she reiterated those comments, while also oddly commenting that Google received the same demand, despite ICEBlock intentionally being designed for iPhone only.

She also falsely claimed that ICEBlock “was reckless and criminal in that people were posting where ICE officers lived” but “subsequently walked back that statement,” Aaron’s complaint said.

Aaron is hoping the US District Court in the District of Columbia will agree that “Bondi’s demand to Apple to remove ICEBlock from the App store, as well as her viewpoint-based criticism of CNN for publicizing the app, constitute a ‘scheme of state censorship’ designed to ‘suppress’” Aaron’s “publication and distribution of the App.”

His lawyer, Noam Biale, told Ars that “Attorney General Bondi’s self-congratulatory claim that she succeeded in pushing Apple to remove ICEBlock is an admission that she violated our client’s constitutional rights. In America, government officials cannot suppress free speech by pressuring private companies to do it for them.”

Similarly, statements from Noem, Lyons, and Homan constituted “excessive pressure on Apple to remove the App and others like it from the App Store,” Aaron’s complaint alleged, as well as unconstitutional suppression of Aaron’s and ICEBlock users’ speech.

ICEBlock creator was one of the first Mac Geniuses

Aaron maintains that ICEBlock prominently features a disclaimer asking all users to “please note that the use of this app is for information and notification purposes only. It is not to be used for the purposes of inciting violence or interfering with law enforcement.”

In his complaint, he explained how the app worked to automatically delete ICE sightings after four hours—information that he said could not be recovered. That functionality ensures that “ICEBlock cannot be used to track ICE agents’ historical presence or movements,” Aaron’s lawsuit noted.

Rather than endangering ICE officers, Aaron argued that ICEBlock helps protect communities from dangerous ICE activity, like tear gassing and pepper spraying, or alleged racial profiling triggering arrests of US citizens and immigrants. Kids have been harmed, his complaint noted, with ICE agents documented “arresting parents and leaving young children unaccompanied” and even once “driving an arrestee’s car away from the scene of arrest with the arrestee’s young toddler still strapped into a car seat.”

Aaron’s top fear driving his development of the app was his concern that escalations in ICE enforcement—including arbitrary orders to hit 75 arrests a day—exposed “immigrants and citizens alike to violence and rampant violations of their civil liberties” that ICEBlock could shield them from.

“These operations have led to widespread and well-documented civil rights violations against citizens, lawful residents, and undocumented immigrants alike, causing serious concern among members of the public, elected officials, and federal courts,” Aaron’s complaint said.

They also “have led some people—regardless of immigration or citizenship status—to want to avoid areas of federal immigration enforcement activities altogether” and “resulted in situations where members of the public may wish, when enforcement activity becomes visible in public spaces, to observe, record, or lawfully protest against such activity.”

In 2001, Aaron worked for Apple as one of the first Mac Geniuses in its Apple Stores. These days, he flexes his self-taught developer skills by creating apps intended to do social good and help communities.

Emphasizing that he was raised in a Jewish household where he heard stories from Holocaust survivors that left a lasting mark, Aaron said that the ICEBlock app represented his “commitment to use his abilities to advocate for the protection of civil liberties.” Without an injunction, he’s concerned that he and other like-minded app makers will remain in the Trump administration’s crosshairs, as the mass deportation scheme rages on through ongoing ICE raids across the US, Aaron told 404 Media.

“More broadly, the purpose [of the lawsuit] is to hold government officials accountable for using their authority to silence lawful expression and intimidate creators of technology they disfavor,” Aaron said. “This case is about ensuring that public officials cannot circumvent the Constitution by coercing private companies or threatening individuals simply because they disagree with the message or the tool being created.”

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

ICEBlock lawsuit: Trump admin bragged about demanding App Store removal Read More »

apple-and-google-reluctantly-comply-with-texas-age-verification-law

Apple and Google reluctantly comply with Texas age verification law

Apple yesterday announced a plan to comply with a Texas age verification law and warned that changes required by the law will reduce privacy for app users.

“Beginning January 1, 2026, a new state law in Texas—SB2420—introduces age assurance requirements for app marketplaces and developers,” Apple said yesterday in a post for developers. “While we share the goal of strengthening kids’ online safety, we are concerned that SB2420 impacts the privacy of users by requiring the collection of sensitive, personally identifiable information to download any app, even if a user simply wants to check the weather or sports scores.”

The Texas App Store Accountability Act requires app stores to verify users’ ages and imposes restrictions on those under 18. Apple said that developers will have “to adopt new capabilities and modify behavior within their apps to meet their obligations under the law.”

Apple’s post noted that similar laws will take effect later in 2026 in Utah and Louisiana. Google also recently announced plans for complying with the three state laws and said the new requirements reduce user privacy.

“While we have user privacy and trust concerns with these new verification laws, Google Play is designing APIs, systems, and tools to help you meet your obligations,” Google told developers in an undated post.

The Utah law is scheduled to take effect May 7, 2026, while the Louisiana law will take effect July 1, 2026. The Texas, Utah, and Louisiana “laws impose significant new requirements on many apps that may need to provide age appropriate experiences to users in these states,” Google said. “These requirements include ingesting users’ age ranges and parental approval status for significant changes from app stores and notifying app stores of significant changes.”

New features for Texas

Apple and Google both announced new features to help developers comply.

“Once this law goes into effect, users located in Texas who create a new Apple Account will be required to confirm whether they are 18 years or older,” Apple said. “All new Apple Accounts for users under the age of 18 will be required to join a Family Sharing group, and parents or guardians will need to provide consent for all App Store downloads, app purchases, and transactions using Apple’s In-App Purchase system by the minor.”

Apple and Google reluctantly comply with Texas age verification law Read More »

musk-threatens-to-sue-apple-so-grok-can-get-top-app-store-ranking

Musk threatens to sue Apple so Grok can get top App Store ranking

After spending last week hyping Grok’s spicy new features, Elon Musk kicked off this week by threatening to sue Apple for supposedly gaming the App Store rankings to favor ChatGPT over Grok.

“Apple is behaving in a manner that makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store, which is an unequivocal antitrust violation,” Musk wrote on X, without providing any evidence. “xAI will take immediate legal action.”

In another post, Musk tagged Apple, asking, “Why do you refuse to put either X or Grok in your ‘Must Have’ section when X is the #1 news app in the world and Grok is #5 among all apps?”

“Are you playing politics?” Musk asked. “What gives? Inquiring minds want to know.”

Apple did not respond to the post and has not responded to Ars’ request to comment.

At the heart of Musk’s complaints is an OpenAI partnership that Apple announced last year, integrating ChatGPT into versions of its iPhone, iPad, and Mac operating systems.

Musk has alleged that this partnership incentivized Apple to boost ChatGPT rankings. OpenAI’s popular chatbot “currently holds the top spot in the App Store’s ‘Top Free Apps’ section for iPhones in the US,” Reuters noted, “while xAI’s Grok ranks fifth and Google’s Gemini chatbot sits at 57th.” Sensor Tower data shows ChatGPT similarly tops Google Play Store rankings.

While Musk seems insistent that ChatGPT is artificially locked in the lead, fact-checkers on X added a community note to his post. They confirmed that at least one other AI tool has somewhat recently unseated ChatGPT in the US rankings. Back in January, DeepSeek topped App Store charts and held the lead for days, ABC News reported.

OpenAI did not immediately respond to Ars’ request to comment on Musk’s allegations, but an OpenAI developer, Steven Heidel, did add a quip in response to one of Musk’s posts, writing, “Don’t forget to also blame Google for OpenAI being #1 on Android, and blame SimilarWeb for putting ChatGPT above X on the most-visited websites list, and blame….”

Musk threatens to sue Apple so Grok can get top App Store ranking Read More »

apple-gives-eu-users-app-store-options-in-attempt-to-avoid-massive-fines

Apple gives EU users App Store options in attempt to avoid massive fines

Apple is changing its App Store policies in the EU in a last-minute attempt to avoid a series of escalating fines from Brussels.

The $3 trillion iPhone maker will allow developers in the bloc to offer apps designed for the iOS operating system in places other than Apple’s App Store, the company said.

Apple has been negotiating for two months with the European Commission after being fined €500 million for breaching the EU’s Digital Markets Act, the landmark legislation designed to curtail the power of Big Tech groups.

Throughout the process, Apple has accused the commission of moving the goalposts on what the company needs to do to comply with the EU’s digital rule book.

Apple announced the measures on Thursday, the deadline for the company to comply with the bloc’s rules in order to avoid new levies. The financial penalties can escalate over time and reach up to 5 percent of average daily worldwide revenue.

Still, an Apple spokesperson said that “the European Commission is requiring Apple to make a series of additional changes to the App Store. We disagree with this outcome and plan to appeal.”

In a reaction to the changes, a European Commission spokesperson said that “the commission will now assess these new business terms for DMA compliance.”

The spokesperson added that “the commission considers it particularly important to obtain the views of market operators and interested third parties before deciding on next steps.”

The decision on the new fines under the Digital Markets Act comes as Brussels and Washington near a July 9 deadline to agree on a trade deal.

The EU’s rules on Big Tech are a flashpoint between Brussels and US President Donald Trump. But commission leaders have indicated they would not change their rule book as a part of trade negotiations with the US.

© 2025 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be redistributed, copied, or modified in any way.

Apple gives EU users App Store options in attempt to avoid massive fines Read More »

apps-like-kindle-are-already-taking-advantage-of-court-mandated-ios-app-store-changes

Apps like Kindle are already taking advantage of court-mandated iOS App Store changes

As of an update released today, the iOS app still doesn’t allow books to be purchased directly in the app, but you can search Amazon’s virtual bookstore inside the app and tap a new “Get Book” button that automatically pops you over to Amazon.com in your phone or tablet’s default browser. This is not as convenient for users as allowing them to purchase digital goods or services directly in the app, but it does make things a lot more friendly for users of apps whose developers don’t want to pay Apple a cut.

For the first time ever, the Kindle app on iOS can automatically direct book buyers to Amazon’s site to complete a purchase. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

Apple’s position on its App Store commissions has generally been, to write a high-level summary, that these third-party app developers benefit from the size and reach of Apple’s platform, the work Apple does to maintain the App Store and to make apps discoverable, and Apple’s payment processing services, among other benefits.

Even when it complied with a court order to allow third-party developers to use alternate payment processors in their apps, Apple still insisted on a 12 to 27 percent cut (rather than the usual 15 to 30 percent) to cover these other less-tangible benefits of offering apps and services on Apple’s devices. (Apple’s method of complying with that ruling, including onerous filing requirements for developers who used third-party payment services, was one of many things Judge Gonzalez criticized Apple for in last week’s ruling.)

A new headache for Apple

Apple is appealing last week’s ruling, and it may well succeed in the end, giving the company the ability to roll back these rule changes and once again force developers to either use Apple’s in-app payments or force users to buy goods and services externally. But even if this change is only temporary, it still creates new potential PR headaches for Apple.

Apps like Kindle are already taking advantage of court-mandated iOS App Store changes Read More »

musi-fans-refuse-to-update-iphones-until-apple-unblocks-controversial-app

Musi fans refuse to update iPhones until Apple unblocks controversial app

“The public interest in the preservation of intellectual property rights weighs heavily against the injunction sought here, which would force Apple to distribute an app over the repeated and consistent objections of non-parties who allege their rights are infringed by the app,” Apple argued.

Musi fans vow loyalty

For Musi fans expressing their suffering on Reddit, Musi appears to be irreplaceable.

Unlike other free apps that continually play ads, Musi only serves ads when the app is initially opened, then allows uninterrupted listening. One Musi user also noted that Musi allows for an unlimited number of videos in a playlist, where YouTube caps playlists at 5,000 videos.

“Musi is the only playback system I have to play all 9k of my videos/songs in the same library,” the Musi fan said. “I honestly don’t just use Musi just cause it’s free. It has features no other app has, especially if you like to watch music videos while you listen to music.”

“Spotify isn’t cutting it,” one Reddit user whined.

“I hate Spotify,” another user agreed.

“I think of Musi every other day,” a third user who apparently lost the app after purchasing a new phone said. “Since I got my new iPhone, I have to settle for other music apps just to get by (not enough, of course) to listen to music in my car driving. I will be patiently waiting once Musi is available to redownload.”

Some Musi fans who still have access gloat in the threads, while others warn the litigation could soon doom the app for everyone.

Musi continues to perhaps optimistically tell users that the app is coming back, reassuring anyone whose app was accidentally offloaded that their libraries remain linked through iCloud and will be restored if it does.

Some users buy into Musi’s promises, while others seem skeptical that Musi can take on Apple. To many users still clinging to their Musi app, updating their phones has become too risky until the litigation resolves.

“Please,” one Musi fan begged. “Musi come back!!!”

Musi fans refuse to update iPhones until Apple unblocks controversial app Read More »

apple-kicked-musi-out-of-the-app-store-based-on-youtube-lie,-lawsuit-says

Apple kicked Musi out of the App Store based on YouTube lie, lawsuit says


“Will Must ever come back?”

Popular music app says YouTube never justified its App Store takedown request.

Musi, a free music-streaming app only available on iPhone, sued Apple last week, arguing that Apple breached Musi’s developer agreement by abruptly removing the app from its App Store for no good reason.

According to Musi, Apple decided to remove Musi from the App Store based on allegedly “unsubstantiated” claims from YouTube that Musi was infringing on YouTube’s intellectual property. The removal came, Musi alleged, based on a five-word complaint from YouTube that simply said Musi was “violating YouTube terms of service”—without ever explaining how. And YouTube also lied to Apple, Musi’s complaint said, by claiming that Musi neglected to respond to YouTube’s efforts to settle the dispute outside the App Store when Musi allegedly showed evidence that the opposite was true.

For years, Musi users have wondered if the service was legal, Wired reported in a May deep dive into the controversial app. Musi launched in 2016, providing a free, stripped-down service like Spotify by displaying YouTube and other publicly available content while running Musi’s own ads.

Musi’s curious ad model has led some users to question if artists were being paid for Musi streams. Reassuring 66 million users who downloaded the app before its removal from the App Store, Musi has long maintained that artists get paid for Musi streams and that the app is committed to complying with YouTube’s terms of service, Wired reported.

In its complaint, Musi fully admits that its app’s streams come from “publicly available content on YouTube’s website.” But rather than relying on YouTube’s Application Programming Interface (API) to make the content available to Musi users—which potentially could violate YouTube’s terms of service—Musi claims that it designed its own “augmentative interface.” That interface, Musi said, does not “store, process, or transmit YouTube videos” and instead “plays or displays content based on the user’s own interactions with YouTube and enhances the user experience via Musi’s proprietary technology.”

YouTube is apparently not buying Musi’s explanations that its service doesn’t violate YouTube’s terms. But Musi claimed that it has been “engaged in sporadic dialog” with YouTube “since at least 2015,” allegedly always responding to YouTube’s questions by either adjusting how the Musi app works or providing “details about how the Musi app works” and reiterating “why it is fully compliant with YouTube’s Terms of Service.”

How might Musi have violated YouTube’s TOS?

In 2021, Musi claimed to have engaged directly with YouTube’s outside counsel in hopes of settling this matter.

At that point, YouTube’s counsel allegedly “claimed that the Musi app violated YouTube’s Terms of Service” in three ways. First, Musi was accused of accessing and using YouTube’s non-public interfaces. Next, the Musi app was allegedly a commercial use of YouTube’s service, and third, relatedly, “the Musi app violated YouTube’s prohibition on the sale of advertising ‘on any page of any website or application that only contains Content from the Service or where Content from the Service is the primary basis for such sales.'”

Musi supposedly immediately “addressed these concerns” by reassuring YouTube that the Musi app never accesses its non-public interfaces and “merely allows users to access YouTube’s publicly available website through a functional interface and, thus, does not use YouTube in a commercial way.” Further, Musi told YouTube in 2021 that the app “does not sell advertising on any page that only contains content from YouTube or where such content is the primary basis for such sales.”

Apple suddenly becomes mediator

YouTube clearly was not persuaded by Musi’s reassurances but dropped its complaints until 2023. That’s when YouTube once again complained directly to Musi, only to allegedly stop responding to Musi entirely and instead raise its complaint through the App Store in August 2024.

That pivot put Apple in the middle of the dispute, and Musi alleged that Apple improperly sided with YouTube.

Once Apple got involved, Apple allegedly directed Musi to resolve the dispute with YouTube or else risk removal from the App Store. Musi claimed that it showed evidence of repeatedly reaching out to YouTube and receiving no response. Yet when YouTube told Apple that Musi was the one that went silent, Apple accepted YouTube’s claim and promptly removed Musi from the App Store.

“Apple’s decision to abruptly and arbitrarily remove the Musi app from the App Store without any indication whatsoever from the Complainant as to how Musi’s app infringed Complainant’s intellectual property or violated its Terms of Service,” Musi’s complaint alleged, “was unreasonable, lacked good cause, and violated Apple’s Development Agreement’s terms.”

Those terms state that removal is only on the table if Apple “reasonably believes” an app infringes on another’s intellectual property rights, and Musi argued Apple had no basis to “reasonably” believe YouTube’s claims.

Musi users heartbroken by App Store removal

This is perhaps the grandest stand that Musi has made yet to defend its app against claims that its service isn’t legal. According to Wired, one of Musi’s earliest investors backed out of the project, expressing fears that the app could be sued. But Musi has survived without legal challenge for years, even beating out some of Spotify’s top rivals while thriving in this seemingly gray territory that it’s now trying to make more black and white.

Musi says it’s suing to defend its reputation, which it says has been greatly harmed by the app’s removal.

Musi is hoping a jury will agree that Apple breached its developer agreement and the covenant of good faith and fair dealing by removing Musi from the App Store. The music-streaming app has asked for a permanent injunction immediately reinstating Musi in the App Store and stopping Apple from responding to third-party complaints by removing apps without any evidence of infringement.

An injunction is urgently needed, Musi claimed, since the app only exists in Apple’s App Store, and Musi and its users face “irreparable damage” if the app is not restored. Additionally, Musi is seeking damages to be determined at trial to make up for “lost profits and other consequential damages.”

“The Musi app did not and does not infringe any intellectual property rights held by Complainant, and a reasonable inquiry into the matter would have led Apple to conclude the same,” Musi’s complaint said.

On Reddit, Musi has continued to support users reporting issues with the app since its removal from the App Store. One longtime user lamented, “my heart is broken,” after buying a new iPhone and losing access to the app.

It’s unclear if YouTube intends to take Musi down forever with this tactic. In May, Wired noted that Musi isn’t the only music-streaming app taking advantage of publicly available content, predicting that if “Musi were to shut down, a bevy of replacements would likely sprout up.” Meanwhile, some users on Reddit reported that fake Musi apps keep popping up in its absence.

For Musi, getting back online is as much about retaining old users as it is about attracting new downloads. In its complaint, Musi said that “Apple’s decision has caused immediate and ongoing financial and reputational harm to Musi.” On Reddit, one Musi user asked what many fans are likely wondering: “Will Musi ever come back,” or is it time to “just move to a different app”?

Ars could not immediately reach Musi’s lawyers, Apple, or YouTube for comment.

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Apple kicked Musi out of the App Store based on YouTube lie, lawsuit says Read More »

apple-splits-app-store-team-in-two,-introduces-new-leadership

Apple splits App Store team in two, introduces new leadership

Shake-up —

This is the latest in a series of changes resulting from EU regulation.

The Apple Park campus in Cupertino, California.

Enlarge / The Apple Park campus in Cupertino, California.

Apple is comprehensively restructuring its long-standing App Store team, splitting the team into two separate divisions as the executive who has run it for more than a decade says goodbye to the company.

There will now be one team for the familiar, Apple-run App Store, and another one to handle alternative app stores in the European Union. Apple recently partially opened the platform to third-party app stores in response to the Digital Markets Act, a set of European regulations meant to break up what legislators and regulators deemed to be app store monopolies.

As noted, the restructuring comes with some notable personnel changes, too. App Store Vice President Matt Fischer, who has been at the helm of the platform since 2010, will leave the company.

In a social media post and email to employees, Fischer wrote the following:

After 21 years at Apple, I’ve made the decision to step away from our incredible company. This has been on my mind for some time, and as we are also reorganizing the team to better manage new challenges and opportunities, now is the right moment to pass the baton to two outstanding leaders on my team—Carson Oliver and Ann Thai—both of whom are more than ready for this next chapter.

You can visit his LinkedIn post to see the full statement. According to Bloomberg, Carson Oliver will lead the Apple App Store division, while Ann Thai will head up the alternative app store team. Up to this point, Oliver has been a senior director of business management at Apple, while Thai has had the title of worldwide product director for the App Store and Apple Arcade.

It’s worth noting that Fischer was the overall lead for Apple Arcade, so that service will now be under new leadership.

Apple Fellow and former marketing SVP Phil Schiller will continue to oversee both of the new divisions.

It’s unclear what further changes, if any, will result from this shakeup. Apple has already made significant changes in response to EU regulations, but some developers and competitors are still critical, saying it hasn’t gone far enough.

Apple splits App Store team in two, introduces new leadership Read More »

classic-pc-game-emulation-is-back-on-the-iphone-with-idos-3-release

Classic PC game emulation is back on the iPhone with iDOS 3 release

Emulation —

Apple amended its App Store rules to allow PC emulators, not just console ones.

An MS-DOS command line prompt showing the C drive

Enlarge / The start of any journey in MS-DOS.

Samuel Axon

After a 14-year journey of various states of availability and usefulness amid the shifting policies of Apple’s App Store approval process, MS-DOS game emulator iDOS is back on the iPhone and iPad. It’s hopefully here to stay this time.

iDOS allows you to run applications made for MS-DOS via DOSBox, with a nice retro-styled interface. Its main use case is definitely playing DOS games, but it has seen a rocky road to get to this point. Initially released over a decade ago, it existed quietly for its niche audience, though it saw some changes that made it more or less useful in the developer’s quest to avoid removal from the App Store after it violated Apple’s rules. That culminated in it being removed altogether in 2021 after some tweets and articles brought attention to it.

But earlier this year, Apple made big changes to its App Store rules, officially allowing “retro game emulators” for the first time. That cleared the way for a wave of working console game emulators like Delta and RetroArch, which mostly work as you might expect them to on any other platform now. But when iDOS developer Chaoji Li and other purveyors of classic PC emulator software attempted to do the same for old PC games for MS-DOS and other non-console computing platforms, they were stymied. Apple told them that it didn’t consider their apps to be retro game console emulators and that they violated rules intended to prevent people from circumventing the App Store by running applications from other sources.

PC emulator UTM released a version of its software that worked around Apple’s rules, but it was a subpar experience. But on August 2, Apple amended its App Store rules to explicitly allow emulators of classic PC games. That opened the door for iDOS, which has made its triumphant return and works quite well.

Developer Chaoji Li’s announcement of iDOS 3’s availability didn’t have a tone of triumph to it, though—more like exhaustion, given the app’s struggles over the years:

It has been a long wait for common sense to prevail within Apple. As much as I want to celebrate, I still can’t help being a little bit cautious about the future. Are we good from now on?

Get iDOS3 on AppStore

I hope iDOS can now enjoy its turn to stay and grow.

P.S. Even though words feel inadequate at times, I would like to say thank you to the supporters of iDOS. In many ways, you keep iDOS alive.

Given that Apple’s policy changes were driven by regulatory concerns, it seems likely it’ll stick this time, but after everything that’s happened, you can’t blame Li for putting a question mark on this.

In any case, if you’re among the dozens (or maybe several hundred) of people looking to play Commander KeenMight and Magic: The World of Xeen, Wolfenstein 3D, or Jill of the Jungle on your iPhone, today is your day.

Classic PC game emulation is back on the iPhone with iDOS 3 release Read More »

apple-removes-the-first-ios-game-boy-emulator-released-under-new-app-store-rules

Apple removes the first iOS Game Boy emulator released under new App Store rules

Easy come, easy go —

iGBA seems to have taken unauthorized code from earlier GBA4iOS project.

Photos of iGBA that appeared on the App Store before the app was taken down.

Enlarge / Photos of iGBA that appeared on the App Store before the app was taken down.

Over the weekend, developer Mattia La Spina launched iGBA as one of the first retro game emulators legitimately available on the iOS App Store following Apple’s rules change regarding such emulators earlier this month. As of Monday morning, though, iGBA has been pulled from the App Store following controversy over the unauthorized reuse of source code from a different emulator project.

Shortly after iGBA’s launch, some people on social media began noticing that the project appeared to be based on the code for GBA4iOS, a nearly decade-old emulator that developer Riley Testut and a partner developed as high-schoolers (and distributed via a temporary security hole in the iOS App Store). Testut took to social media Sunday morning to call iGBA a “knock-off” of GBA4iOS. “I did not give anyone permission to do this, yet it’s now sitting at the top of the charts (despite being filled with ads + tracking),” he wrote.

GBA4iOS is an open source program released under the GNU GPLv2 license, with licensing terms that let anyone “use, modify, and distribute my original code for this project without fear of legal consequences.” But those expansive licensing terms only apply “unless you plan to submit your app to Apple’s App Store, in which case written permission from me is explicitly required.”

Images from the original, circa 2014 version of GBA4iOS.

Images from the original, circa 2014 version of GBA4iOS.

“To be clear, I’m not pissed at the developer [of iGBA],” Testut added on social media. “I’m pissed that Apple took the time to change the App Store rules to allow emulators and then approved a knock-off of my own app.”

Hurry up and wait

MacRumors reports that Apple cited two sections of its App Store guidelines in removing iGBA: one related to spam (Section 4.3) and one related to copyright (section 5.2). Right now, it’s a bit ambiguous whether the copyright violation refers to the copyright on the emulator source code itself or the emulator’s ability to easily play copyrighted games from Nintendo and others.

As we discussed earlier this month, the wording of Apple’s recent App Store guidelines update makes it unclear if developers can release general-purpose emulators with the ability to play ROMs they don’t control the rights to. Aside from iGBA, a Commodore 64 emulator named Emu64 XL and built off of the open source VICE project was recently launched on the iOS App Store.

Apple has yet to respond to a request for comment from Ars Technica. But Testut wrote early Monday morning that “to Apple’s credit, though, once they were aware of the issue, they did take it seriously. So I really don’t believe this was malicious at all — just an unfortunate situation for everyone involved.” Testut added that iGBA maker La Spina “reached out to me via email to personally apologize for the mess. So no hard feelings there.”

But Testut did have some hard feelings regarding Apple’s treatment of AltStore, an alternative marketplace for sideloading iOS apps that he’s trying to launch under the EU’s new regulations. That would provide Testut with a legitimate way to distribute Delta, a “sequel” to GBA4iOS that emulates many classic Nintendo consoles on Apple devices.

“My frustration stemmed entirely from the fact we’ve been ready to launch Delta since last month,” Tetstut wrote on social media. “This whole situation could’ve been avoided if Apple hadn’t delayed approving us until after changing their rules to allow emulators.”

Apple removes the first iOS Game Boy emulator released under new App Store rules Read More »

google-mocks-epic’s-proposed-reforms-to-end-android-app-market-monopoly

Google mocks Epic’s proposed reforms to end Android app market monopoly

Google mocks Epic’s proposed reforms to end Android app market monopoly

Epic Games has filed a proposed injunction that would stop Google from restricting third-party app distribution outside Google Play Store on Android devices after proving that Google had an illegal monopoly in markets for Android app distribution.

Epic is suggesting that competition on the Android mobile platform would be opened up if the court orders Google to allow third-party app stores to be distributed for six years in the Google Play Store and blocks Google from entering any agreements with device makers that would stop them from pre-loading third-party app stores. This would benefit both mobile developers and users, Epic argued in a wide-sweeping proposal that would greatly limit Google’s control over the Android app ecosystem.

US District Court Judge James Donato will ultimately decide the terms of the injunction. Google has until May 3 to respond to Epic’s filing.

A Google spokesperson confirmed to Ars that Google still plans to appeal the verdict—even though Google already agreed to a $700 million settlement with consumers and states following Epic’s win.

“Epic’s filing to the US Federal Court shows again that it simply wants the benefits of Google Play without having to pay for it,” Google’s spokesperson said. “We’ll continue to challenge the verdict, as Android is an open mobile platform that faces fierce competition from the Apple App Store, as well as app stores on Android devices, PCs, and gaming consoles.”

If Donato accepts Epic’s proposal, Google would be required to grant equal access to the Android operating system and platform features to all developers, not just developers distributing apps through Google Play. This would allow third-party app stores to become the app update owner, updating any apps downloaded from their stores as seamlessly as Google Play updates apps.

Under Epic’s terms, any app downloaded from anywhere would operate identically to apps downloaded from Google Play, without Google imposing any unnecessary distribution fees. Similarly, developers would be able to provide their own in-app purchasing options and inform users of out-of-app purchasing options, without having to use Google’s APIs or paying Google additional fees.

Notably, Epic filed its lawsuit after Google removed the Epic game Fortnite from the Google Play Store because Epic tried to offer an “Epic Direct Payment” option for in-game purchases.

“Google must also allow developers to communicate directly with their consumers, including linking from their app to a website to make purchases and get deals,” Epic said in a blog post. “Google would be blocked from using sham compliance programs like User Choice Billing to prevent competing payment options inside an app or on a developer’s website.”

Unsurprisingly, Epic’s proposed injunction includes an “anti-retaliation” section specifically aimed at protecting Epic from any further retaliation. If Donato accepts the terms, Google would be violating the injunction order if the tech giant fails to prove that it is not “treating Epic differently than other developers” by making it “disproportionately difficult or costly” for Epic to develop, update, and market its apps on Android.

That part of the injunction would seem important since, last month, Epic announced that an Epic Games Store was “coming to iOS and Android” later this year. According to Inc, Epic told Game Developers Conference attendees that its app-distribution platform will be the “first ever game-focused, multiplatform store,” working across “Android, iOS, PC and macOS.”

Google mocks Epic’s proposed reforms to end Android app market monopoly Read More »

apple-now-allows-retro-game-emulators-on-its-app-store—but-with-big-caveats

Apple now allows retro game emulators on its App Store—but with big caveats

RETRO GAMES —

It’s probably not the Wild West of game emulation you’re hoping for. Here’s why.

A screenshot of Sonic the Hedgehog on an iPhone

Enlarge / The classic Sega Genesis game Sonic the Hedgehog running on an iPhone—in this case, as a standalone app.

Samuel Axon

When Apple posted its latest update to the App Store’s app review and submission policies for developers, it included language that appears to explicitly allow a new kind of app for emulating retro console games.

Apple has long forbidden apps that run code from an external source, but today’s announced changes now allow “software that is not embedded in the binary” in certain cases, with “retro game console emulator apps can offer to download games” specifically listed as one of those cases.

Here’s the exact wording:

4.7 Mini apps, mini games, streaming games, chatbots, plug-ins, and game emulators

Apps may offer certain software that is not embedded in the binary, specifically HTML5 mini apps and mini games, streaming games, chatbots, and plug-ins. Additionally, retro game console emulator apps can offer to download games. You are responsible for all such software offered in your app, including ensuring that such software complies with these Guidelines and all applicable laws. Software that does not comply with one or more guidelines will lead to the rejection of your app. You must also ensure that the software adheres to the additional rules that follow in 4.7.1 and 4.7.5. These additional rules are important to preserve the experience that App Store customers expect, and to help ensure user safety.

It’s a little fuzzy how this will play out, but it may not allow the kind of emulators you see on Android and desktop, which let you play retro games from any outside source.

Retro game emulators run what are colloquially called ROM files, which are more or less images of the game cartridges or discs that played on console hardware. By now, it’s well-established that the emulators themselves are completely legal, but the legality of the ROM files downloaded from ROM sites on the Internet depends on the specific files and circumstances.

There are ROMs that are entirely public domain or in some license where the creator allows distribution; there are ROMs that are technically copyrighted intellectual property but where the original owner no longer exists, and the current ownership is unknown or unenforced; and there are some ROMs (like many games made by Nintendo) where the owner still has an interest in controlling distribution and often takes action to try to curb illegal sharing and use of the files.

Additionally, many game publishers use emulators to run ROMs of their own retro games, which they sell to consumers either as standalone games or in collections for modern platforms.

It’s not completely clear from Apple’s wording, but our interpretation of Apple’s new rules is that it’s likely only the last of those examples will be possible; companies that own the intellectual property could launch emulator apps for downloading ROMs of their (and only their) games. So, for example, Sega could offer a Sega app that would allow users to download an ever-expanding library of Sega games, either as part of a subscription, for free, or as in-app purchases. Sega has offered its retro games on the iPhone before in emulation but with a standalone app for each game.

“You are responsible for all such software offered in your app, including ensuring that such software complies with these Guidelines and all applicable laws,” Apple writes. And it specifically says “retro game console emulator apps can offer to download games” in the list of exceptions to the rules against “software that is not embedded inside the binary”—but it doesn’t list any other method for retro game console emulator apps.

Whatever the case, this update is not limited to the European Union. Apple has been subjected to regulatory scrutiny in both the EU and the United States regarding its App Store rules. It’s likely the company is making this change to preempt criticism in this area, though it did not name its reasons when announcing the change other than to say it has been made to “support updated policies, upcoming features, and to provide clarification.”

Apple now allows retro game emulators on its App Store—but with big caveats Read More »