Senate Consumer Protection Subcommittee Chairman Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., considers Apple’s proposed $100 million settlement to end a class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Oakland involving small U.S. iOS app developers a “significant step forward, but does not rectify the full and vivid range of market abuses and practices still widespread across app markets.” The plaintiffs claimed Apple monopolized U.S. distribution services for iOS apps and in-app purchases that resulted in commission overcharges to app developers. The proposed settlement in case 4:19-cv-03074-YGR would use the $100 million to set up a Small Developer Assistance Fund, for developers whose annual proceeds totaled less than $1 million between June 4, 2015, and April 26, 2021, Hagens Berman, one of the firms representing plaintiffs, said. Developers can claim up to $30,000 from the fund. Apple also agreed to change its app store rules to allow developers to communicate with customers outside their apps about purchasing and pricing alternatives to Apple’s in-app purchase system, Hagens Berman said. A website to administer the $100 million won’t go live until the Oakland court approves the settlement. “Today’s move only adds to the momentum” for passing the Open App Markets Act (HR-5017/S-2710) “and further exposes rampant anticompetitive abuses in the app markets,” Blumenthal said in a statement. “The fox guarding the hen house status quo will remain until there are clear and enforceable rules for Apple and Google to play by.” Cowen’s Paul Gallant believes the settlement “won't derail the bipartisan interest in opening up app stores to different payment mechanisms.” He cited the Coalition for App Fairness’ criticisms of the proposal.

Amazon’s palm-print recognition and payment system, Amazon One, could be used to “further cement” the company’s “competitive power and suppress competition across various markets,” wrote Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., to the company Friday. They noted reports about Amazon “offering credits to consumers to share their biometric data with Amazon One.” Expansion of biometric data “raises serious questions about Amazon’s plans for this data and its respect for user privacy, including about how Amazon may use the data for advertising and tracking purposes,” the senators wrote. The company didn’t comment.

A bipartisan House duo introduced companion legislation Friday meant to increase competition with Google and Apple app stores (see 2108110055). Senate Antitrust Subcommittee ranking member Ken Buck, R-Colo., and House Intellectual Property Subcommittee Chairman Hank Johnson, D-Ga., introduced the Open App Markets Act. It would “level the playing field for small app developers, strengthen consumer choice within the app marketplace, and ensure that antitrust laws are working properly in the digital ecosystem,” Johnson and Buck said in their announcement.

Legislation introduced Wednesday is meant to increase competition with Google and Apple app stores. Introduced by Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.; and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., the Open App Markets Act will “open the app economy to new competitors, and give mobile users more control over their own devices,” said Blumenthal. The bill would protect “developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing,” plus app sideloading options for consumers. It would “prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers” and “set safeguards to continue to protect privacy, security, and safety of consumers,” said the announcement. The bill addresses competition harms and “ensures fairness to users and developers without forcing compromises on security or privacy,” wrote Public Knowledge Legal Director John Bergmayer. PK noted the legislation is in line with recommendations from its recent white paper.

Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss., pressed the Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security Wednesday for details on its implementation of a final rule that adds Huawei non-U.S. affiliates to the bureau’s entity list, replaces a general license with a more restrictive authorization and expands the scope of its foreign direct product rule constricting the company’s ability to procure items that are the direct product of U.S. tech. “My staff has reviewed evidence suggesting possible non-compliance with” the final Huawei rule, Wicker wrote acting Undersecretary-Industry and Security Jeremy Pelter. Wicker said BIS officials claimed they couldn’t disclose information Wicker’s office sought on the implementation process because it’s covered under the 2018 Export Control Reform Act. That information “neither focused on any particular company’s compliance nor could have resulted in a breach of confidentiality for a company under investigation,” Wicker said. He sought information by Aug. 16 on how many companies have “sought a license to ship to Huawei or its affiliates,” how many of those applications BIS has processed and how many it has denied. BIS didn’t comment.

Amazon again supplanted Facebook in Q2 as top lobbying spender in tech and telecom, with NCTA and Comcast rounding out the top four. Huawei, Twitter, the Information Technology Industry Council and Telecommunications Industry Association had the sectors' largest percentage increases compared with the same period last year. Broadcom, BSA|The Software Alliance and the Computer and Communications Industry Association had large decreases. Amazon spent $4.86 million in Q2, up almost 11%. Facebook paid $4.77 million, down 1%. NCTA disbursed $3.26 million, down more than 10%. Comcast spent $3.25 million, down almost 11%. AT&T spent just over $3 million, down more than 10%. Verizon expended $2.76 million, up almost 9%. Charter Communications was little changed at $2.57 million, and CTIA at $2.5 million was also flat. Microsoft spent $2.47 million, a 15% decrease. T-Mobile spent $2.4 million, down 8%. NAB fell 5% to $2.18 million. Qualcomm gained 8% to $2.13 million. Google reported $2 million, a more than 23% increase. Apple had $1.64 million, an almost 11% increase. ViacomCBS paid $1.6 million, up 39%. Dell's $1.12 million was a 23% increase. Huawei spent just over $1 million, a 523% increase. IBM was $980,000, down more than 5%. Disney spent $830,000, down more than 6%. Cox's $810,000 was down almost 13%. Twitter spent $660,000, a 69% increase. ITI spent $600,000, rising 43%. USTelecom was relatively unchanged at $570,000. Lumen had $520,000, an almost 9% increase. The Internet Association disclosed $390,000, up more than 14%. Broadcom posted $360,000, down 40%. BSA was $290,000, down almost 31%. ACA Connects was level at $160,000. NTCA also spent $160,000, an 11% decrease. ICANN spent $85,000, similar to Q2 2020. TIA spent $70,000, a 40% increase. CCIA's $30,000 was down 25%.

House Republicans launched the Freedom From Big Tech Caucus Friday to focus on antitrust, censorship and privacy. Antitrust Subcommittee ranking member Ken Buck, R-Colo., formed the caucus with Texas’ Lance Gooden, Utah’s Burgess Owens, North Carolina’s Madison Cawthorn and Arizona’s Paul Gosar. They accused Big Tech of rigging the free market, stifling innovation, “cozying up” to China and censoring Americans.

The House Appropriations Committee voted 33-24 Tuesday to advance its FY 2022 funding bill for the FCC and FTC. The measure proposes giving the FCC $388 million and the FTC almost $390 million, mirroring what President Joe Biden proposed in late May (see 2105280055). A report on the legislation seeks further work on changes to USF contribution rules and wants additional study of how municipal broadband can expand connectivity access (see 2106290066). The committee approved an amendment to the bill from Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, that would bar funding for government cloud computing unless the cloud services don't store or transmit images depicting violations of child exploitation law.

The House planned to vote Monday evening on two alternative bills to the Senate’s Endless Frontier Act (see 2106150078), House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., announced Friday. The National Science Foundation for the Future Act (HR-2225) and the Department of Energy Science for the Future Act (HR-3593) were scheduled for votes under suspension of the rules after 6:30 p.m.

House Science Committee member Rep. Deborah Ross, D-N.C., led filing Monday of the National Science and Technology Strategy Act to institute a quadrennial review of U.S. science and tech issues. HR-3858 would direct the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the National Science and Technology Council to lead the review and develop a four-year policy strategy. HR-3858 would require the White House to send an annual report to Congress on national research priorities and potential threats to U.S. leadership in the science and tech field. “This legislation would require the federal government to take a methodical, comprehensive approach to plan for and meet our research and development needs,” Ross said. Technology Subcommittee ranking member Michael Waltz of Florida is HR-3858’s main GOP sponsor. Science Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, and ranking member Frank Lucas, R-Okla., are also co-sponsors. The committee is set Tuesday to mark up the National Science Foundation for the Future Act (HR-2225), a rival measure to the Senate-passed U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (S-1260). Johnson and Lucas have opposed S-1260 over its proposal to create a Technology Directorate within NSF (see 2104270045). The virtual markup begins at 10 a.m.