what do folk think of the DMA's FRAND language?

Hello all,

I'd like to call your attention to Article 57 of the agreed-upon language
for the Digital Markets Act, according to the attached copy of the
"4-column" agreement, page 85 of the PDF: "For software application stores,
online search engines and online social networking services identified
pursuant to Article 3 (7), gatekeepers should publish and apply general
conditions of access that should be fair, reasonable and
non-discriminatory. These general conditions should provide for a Union
based alternative dispute settlement mechanism that should be easily
accessible, impartial, independent and, free of charge for the business
user, without prejudice to the business user’s own cost and proportionate
measures aimed at preventing the abuse of the dispute settlement mechanism
by business users. The dispute settlement mechanism should be without
prejudice to the right of business users to seek redress before judicial
authorities in accordance with national and Union law."

While obviously this falls short of the explicit requirements for mandatory
interoperability provided for messaging, there is nevertheless very broad
language in there, and I'm curious how the Europeans in this group in
particular would interpret "general conditions of access". I'd love to have
that mean "third-party accessible, documented APIs", even if they're not
universally *free* APIs (because that doesn't scale well). The remaining,
preexisting language of Article 57 offers a little more explanation of
scope that seems to incline towards that direction, in that the article is
meant to permit "business users" (aka downstream services?) to reach the
platform's users on a fair basis.

Cheers,
Chris