The decision not to roll out Siri AI in the EU is Apple's and Apple's only
In the ongoing negotiation between technological ambition and democratic regulation, Apple and the European Union find themselves at an impasse over the rollout of an upgraded Siri AI assistant to European users. The dispute turns on a deep philosophical tension: whether protecting user privacy justifies restricting competitive access, or whether restricting competitive access is itself a form of harm. As Brussels and Cupertino trade accusations of bad faith, millions of European users are left waiting — caught between two institutions, each claiming to act in their interest.
- Apple has blocked its new Siri AI from European users at launch, offering no clear timeline for when — or whether — that will change.
- The company insists EU regulators are forcing an impossible choice: expose user data to competitors without adequate safeguards, or don't launch at all.
- The European Commission fires back that Apple is misreading the law and using privacy concerns as cover for a request to be exempt from rules that apply to everyone.
- At stake is whether rival AI assistants — like Google's — will ever have a fair shot at reaching iPhone users in Europe, which is precisely what the Digital Markets Act was designed to ensure.
- With Apple's 18-month compliance proposal rejected and neither side showing flexibility, the standoff has no visible resolution on the horizon.
Apple's upgraded Siri AI assistant will not reach European iPhone and iPad users when it launches later this year. The company announced the omission shortly after unveiling the new system at its annual developers conference, offering no timeline for eventual access. The reason, Apple says, lies in an irreconcilable conflict with the EU's Digital Markets Act.
The DMA requires the largest technology platforms to give competitors equal access to their systems — a rule designed to prevent dominant players from locking out rivals. Apple argues that under the EU's interpretation, it would be compelled to grant competing virtual assistants direct access to user data without the security protections it considers essential. Rather than launch what it views as an unsafe product, Apple proposed a gradual eighteen-month rollout of a compliant solution. The European Commission rejected that proposal outright.
Commission spokesman Thomas Regnier told reporters in Brussels that Apple was misrepresenting both the law and its own motives. The DMA, he said, does not prohibit new product launches — it simply requires fair access for competitors. He framed Apple's eighteen-month proposal not as a good-faith compliance effort but as a bid for special exemption, comparing it to a driver asking to be excused from speed limits for the sake of convenience.
The implications reach well beyond Siri. If Apple's interpretation prevailed, Regnier argued, rival AI assistants — including Google's — would have no meaningful chance of reaching European iPhone users, defeating the regulation's core purpose. For now, the two sides remain entrenched, and European users are left to wait indefinitely while two powerful institutions argue over who is protecting them.
Apple's new artificial intelligence assistant will not be available to European users when it launches later this year—and the company and the European Union are locked in a dispute over who is responsible for that absence.
The disagreement centers on how to interpret the Digital Markets Act, a sweeping EU regulation designed to prevent the largest technology companies from using their market dominance to shut out competitors. Apple unveiled its upgraded Siri AI system at its annual developers conference on Monday, then announced it would not be rolling out the feature to iPhone and iPad users in the European Union. The company offered no timeline for when European customers might eventually get access.
Apple's explanation was straightforward: the DMA, as the regulation is known, creates an impossible compliance problem. The company said that under the EU's interpretation of the law, it would be forced to give any competing virtual assistant direct access to user data without what Apple considers essential security protections. Rather than launch a product it views as unsafe, Apple said it has designed a solution and a plan to introduce it gradually over eighteen months—but the European Commission rejected that proposal.
Thomas Regnier, a spokesman for the European Commission, rejected Apple's framing entirely. Speaking to reporters in Brussels on Tuesday, he said the company was misrepresenting both the law and its own intentions. The DMA, he insisted, contains nothing that prohibits Apple from introducing new products in the European Union. What the law does require is that the largest tech platforms give competitors equal access to their systems. Regnier characterized Apple's approach not as a good-faith attempt to find a compliant solution, but as a request for special treatment—an eighteen-month exemption from the rules that would apply to everyone else.
The stakes of this disagreement extend beyond Siri. If Apple's interpretation of the DMA were accepted, Regnier suggested, it would mean that no artificial intelligence assistant powered by a rival company—he specifically mentioned Google—would have a fair chance of being selected by European iPhone users. That outcome would defeat the entire purpose of the regulation. He compared the situation to traffic law: the EU would not exempt a driver from speed limits simply because they found compliance inconvenient.
The standoff reveals a fundamental tension between how Apple and European regulators understand the balance between data protection and fair competition. Apple argues that opening user data to multiple AI assistants, even with safeguards, creates unacceptable privacy risks. The EU argues that preventing such access is precisely the kind of gatekeeping behavior the DMA was written to stop. Neither side appears willing to move significantly from its position. For now, European users will simply have to wait—and the question of how long that wait will be remains unanswered.
Citas Notables
The decision not to roll out Siri AI in the EU is Apple's and Apple's only because absolutely nothing in the DMA prohibits Apple from introducing new products in the EU.— Thomas Regnier, European Commission spokesman
Apple complained that under the EU's interpretation of the DMA, it would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to user data without essential protections.— Apple's statement
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does Apple think it needs eighteen months to make this work?
Apple's argument is that it needs time to build what it calls essential protections around how other AI assistants access user data. They're saying the EU's reading of the law would force them to open the door too wide.
But the EU says nothing in the law actually requires that.
Right. Regnier's position is that Apple is conflating two different things—the requirement to give competitors access, and the requirement to do it unsafely. He's saying Apple hasn't actually tried to find a compliant middle ground.
So who's right about what the law says?
That's the real question, and it's genuinely unclear. Apple is interpreting the DMA one way, the Commission another. But what's notable is that Apple isn't fighting this in court—it's just not launching the product.
Why not launch it and let the courts sort it out?
That's the gamble Apple seems unwilling to take. If they launch and the Commission later fines them or forces changes, the damage to their reputation and their systems could be severe. It's safer to wait.
And European users just don't get the feature.
For now, yes. And that's the leverage the EU has—Apple cares about the European market. But it also means Apple gets to say the EU is the obstacle, not them.