Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7030

Bill Overview

Title: Open App Markets Act

Description: This bill establishes rules related to the operation of an app store by a covered company (i.e., the owner or controller of an app store with more than 50 million U.S. users). An app is a software application or electronic service that may be run or directed by a user on a computer or mobile device. An app store is a publicly available website, software application, or other electronic service that distributes apps from third-party developers to users. The bill prohibits a covered company from (1) requiring developers to use an in-app payment system owned or controlled by the company as a condition of distribution or accessibility, (2) requiring that pricing or conditions of sale be equal to or more favorable on its app store than another app store, or (3) taking punitive action against a developer for using or offering different pricing terms or conditions of sale through another in-app payment system or on another app store. A covered company may not interfere with legitimate business communications between developers and users, use non-public business information from a third-party app to compete with the app, or unreasonably prefer or rank its own apps (or those of its business partners) over other apps. The bill provides for enforcement of its provisions by the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, as well as through suits brought by developers that are injured by reason of anything prohibited by this bill.

Sponsors: Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [D-GA-4]

Target Audience

Population: People using or involved with app stores

Estimated Size: 230000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Independent App Developer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I appreciate the potential ability to use different payment systems without fearing punitive actions from app stores.
  • Concerned whether the policy will be implemented effectively.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Director at Major App Store (Seattle, WA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 1/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Concerned about increased legal and operational costs due to compliance.
  • Acknowledges the need for improved fairness in developer relations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 7 8
Year 5 7 8
Year 10 7 8
Year 20 7 8

Consumer, App Enthusiast (Austin, TX)

Age: 23 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy will lead to cheaper app prices and more payment options.
  • Unsure how it might affect the availability of new apps.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Tech Industry Analyst (New York, NY)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could be a game-changer for smaller app developers.
  • Big companies may resist, but consumer choice might improve.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Legal Consultant for Tech Firms (Chicago, IL)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More clients may seek guidance, boosting my business.
  • Policy clarity essential for effective enforcement.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Freelance Software Developer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Could explore new markets without as much restriction from major app stores.
  • Would need to assess how payment systems can be integrated.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Mobile App Consumer (Miami, FL)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If competition leads to better apps and pricing, I'm all for it.
  • Worried it could complicate the app purchase process.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

App Developer (Denver, CO)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reducing dependency on app store payment systems could cut costs.
  • Worried about increased competition from cheap apps.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Senior Developer at a Large App Firm (Boston, MA)

Age: 41 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy could shake up the revenue structure depending on store dependency.
  • Beneficial for platform fairness if implemented well.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Digital Marketing Specialist (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 36 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Expecting an increase in demand for diversified marketing strategies.
  • Skeptical about immediate benefits for consumers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)

Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $82000000)

Year 3: $54080000 (Low: $31930000, High: $84930000)

Year 5: $58377632 (Low: $34426579, High: $91574760)

Year 10: $67171105 (Low: $39606641, High: $105312299)

Year 100: $1179493170 (Low: $695865196, High: $1847461612)

Key Considerations