LONDON, UK — Apple is facing a £2 billion (about Sh349 billion) lawsuit in the United Kingdom over its App Tracking Transparency (ATT) privacy feature, with app developers accusing the technology giant of imposing stricter tracking rules on third-party applications while giving its own advertising services an unfair advantage.
The claim was filed with the Competition Appeal Tribunal by law firm Hausfeld on behalf of UK app developers.
At the centre of the dispute is Apple’s ATT system, introduced in 2021 to give users greater control over whether applications can track their activity across other apps and websites.
The developers allege that Apple designed and implemented the system unfairly and failed to give third-party businesses sufficient time to adapt their business models.
Developers challenge Apple’s tracking rules
Under Apple’s ATT system, apps must obtain a user’s permission through a pop-up notification before tracking activity across other companies’ apps and websites.
Users who decline permission can prevent the app from accessing information used to deliver targeted advertising.
The claimants argue that the rules have disproportionately affected third-party developers whose businesses rely on targeted advertising.
According to Hausfeld, the developers were unable to adapt their business models quickly enough to avoid significant financial losses after the feature was introduced.
The lawsuit seeks compensation for those alleged losses and challenges the way Apple applies its privacy requirements to developers.
Apple disputes allegations
Apple has rejected the claims and defended ATT as a privacy measure designed to give users greater control over their personal information.
An Apple spokesperson said the feature was created:
“to give users a simple way to control whether apps have permission to track their activity across other companies’ apps and websites.”
The company also disputed the suggestion that it applies different requirements to its own services.
Apple said it is bound by the same ATT requirements as other developers and argued that the feature has been welcomed by customers and supported by privacy advocates.
The lawsuit therefore sets up a dispute between Apple’s stated privacy objectives and the developers’ argument that the system has distorted competition in the mobile advertising market.
European regulators have also investigated ATT
The UK case comes as Apple’s tracking rules face scrutiny from competition and regulatory authorities in several European countries.
Authorities in France, Germany, Italy, Romania and Poland have opened investigations or probes relating to Apple’s ATT system.
Apple has already faced financial penalties in some of those jurisdictions.
The company was fined €150 million in France last year and nearly €100 million in Italy in cases concerning the feature.
The European scrutiny reflects a broader debate over whether privacy protections introduced by dominant technology platforms can also affect competition by changing how rival businesses access advertising data.
Former CMA official brings UK claim
The UK action was brought by Ann Pope, a former official at the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority.
Pope said the case was intended to protect British businesses that depend on Apple’s ecosystem and ensure that the rules governing app developers are applied fairly.
“This action is important to protect the rights of British businesses that depend on Apple, to ensure that the rules that Apple applies are fair, and to compensate the losses that British companies have suffered,” she said.
The case will now test the developers’ allegations before the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
Privacy versus competition
The dispute highlights a growing tension in the technology industry between privacy protections and competition.
Apple has positioned ATT as a tool that allows users to decide whether apps can track their activity across different services.
The central question in the UK case will be whether Apple’s privacy framework represents a legitimate and consistently applied protection for users or whether it unfairly disadvantages third-party developers competing within Apple’s ecosystem.
