http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf from page 77, § 58a. IANAL but it looks like it ma

http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/151/1915163.pdf from page 77, § 58a. IANAL but it looks like it matches the summary from the article pretty well. There are some exceptions, like if you can prove that opening it up would weaken the security. But it's rather clearly tailored to apply to Apple Pay. Here's a lightly touched-up translation courtesy of deepl.com -- not sure if the references made it intact (and pretty sure the legalese didn't), but it's using "clause" to refer to the numbered sub-paragraph things: § 58a: Access to technical infrastructure services in connection with the provision of payment services or the conduct of electronic money business (1) An enterprise which contributes to the provision of payment services or the operation of electronic money business in Germany through technical infrastructure services (system enterprise) shall be obliged, upon request of a payment service provider within the meaning of § 1 Clause 1 sentence 1 numbers 1 to 3 or of an electronic money issuer within the meaning of § 1 Clause 2 sentence 1 numbers 1 or 2, to make these technical infrastructure services available without delay and subject to reasonable fees and reasonable conditions of access. The provision within the meaning of sentence 1 must be designed in such a way that the requesting enterprise can provide or operate its payment services or electronic money transactions without hindrance. (2) Clause 1 shall not apply if, at the time of the request, the system operator is not a company whose technical infrastructure services are used by more than 10 payment service providers within the meaning of § 1 Clause 1 Sentence 1 Nos. 1 to 3 or e-money issuers within the meaning of § 1 Clause 2 Sentence 1 Nos. 1 or 2 or which has more than 2 million registered users. (3) In exceptional cases, the system operator shall not be obligated in accordance with Clause 1 if there are objectively justified reasons for refusing to make the service available. These are particularly present if the system enterprise can prove that the security and integrity of the technical infrastructure services is specifically endangered by the provision. The rejection must be comprehensibly justified. (4) If a system enterprise culpably infringes clause 1, it shall be obliged to compensate the inquiring enterprise for the resulting damage. The ordinary legal process is given. (5) The duties and responsibilities of the cartel authorities under the Act against Restraints of Competition shall remain unaffected.