Apple’s Rules Deemed Unfair to Dating Apps by Dutch Court
A Dutch court has reaffirmed a major regulatory decision that found Apple abused its dominant position in the app marketplace – specifically at the expense of dating app developers. The ruling, issued by the Rotterdam District Court, backs a 2021 order by the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM), which accused Apple of enforcing anticompetitive conditions through its App Store policies.
At the center of the case is Apple’s requirement that dating apps use its in-app payment system, blocking developers from steering users toward other payment methods. The company also charged a 30% commission on transactions (15% for smaller developers). The ACM’s investigation began after complaints from dating platforms, and when Apple failed to fully comply with mandated changes, regulators issued escalating fines that eventually totaled €50 million by early 2022.
For dating app providers – many of whom operate on slim margins and depend on direct payment relationships with users – this ruling is significant. It validates long-standing concerns about Apple’s strict App Store controls, which many in the dating sector argue restrict innovation and raise costs unfairly. More importantly, it could lead to changes that make it even easier for new dating startups to succeed in their early days when user numbers tend to be low.
Apple has said it will appeal the court’s decision, claiming the requirements could compromise user privacy and platform security. But the Dutch judgment adds to growing international momentum against Apple’s in-app payment rules. Similar legal and regulatory efforts have taken place in the U.S., South Korea, and across the EU under the new Digital Markets Act.
For dating apps, the outcome could mark a turning point. If the ruling survives appeal, it may pave the way for more flexible and cost-effective payment systems – giving developers more autonomy and making Apple’s App Store a more accessible platform for startups to use if they’re surviving on very slim profits.
