> The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper. Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services.
Remember that it says "free of charge". 50 cents/install past 1M installs is not free of charge now is it?
> So isn't this fee just an extortion attempt?
That's up to the courts to decide, but Apple certainly hasn't painted themselves a favorable picture. When Dutch regulators tried pressing them to include alternative payment services, Apple continued demanding 27% of those transactions. Their disrespectful and obstinate behavior in the Netherlands is what made the DMA such an urgent act in the first place.
So all this will be well-worth keeping an eye on. The iPhone already turns record-breaking profits off hardware sales alone, it will be difficult for Apple to argue they're inherently deserving of taxing aftermarket transactions. At this point, "0%" is starting to seem like the only logical software fee for iOS.