Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 583 posts

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#261

Post by Majromax »

ralph84 wrote: post #141
vageli wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What laws would be broken in this case?

Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party causing economic harm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

> Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations

I think it would depend on the local jurisdiction's definition of the tort. A purchase/refund scheme would not induce Apple or the vendor to breach their app store contract, but it would deprive the vendor of its expected economic benefit.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#262

Post by bambax »

simonh wrote: post #101
bronzeage wrote: post #8

App stores need heavy regulations. It's not only Apple but Google and even steam to a small extent. Apple is of course the biggest offender as they heavily guard their monopoly with code signing enforcement. This shouldn't have been legal. They are the very definitions of predatory competition squashing monopolies.

The iPhone is an Apple product. The App Store is an Apple product. The libraries and development tools needed to create iOS apps are Apple products. Traditionally the company that develops a product gets to decide what features that product has. There are various laws that require a product be safe to use, is not misrepresented and does what it is advertised to do, but beyond that there are very few actual features o…

> There is no law requiring that...

So, let's make them!

Saying that there is "no law" is the weakest argument ever.

We the people make the laws, we can decide whatever we want, and we can certainly vote into law the regulations we think are necessary.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#263

Post by [deleted] »

vageli wrote: post #176
ralph84 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party causing economic harm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

I've heard of this but am curious, does this also apply to people calling for boycotting companies?

[deleted]

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#264

Post by jfkebwjsbx »

bronzeage wrote: post #8

App stores need heavy regulations. It's not only Apple but Google and even steam to a small extent. Apple is of course the biggest offender as they heavily guard their monopoly with code signing enforcement. This shouldn't have been legal. They are the very definitions of predatory competition squashing monopolies.

Steam is the very opposite of a walled garden.

Putting them in the list but leaving out all console manufacturers and operating system devs? Strange.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#265

Post by WA »

kevin_b_er wrote: post #218
andreasley wrote: post #195

A Statement of Tim Cook for the House of Representatives claimed that "For the vast majority of apps on the App Store , developers keep 100% of the money they make." [1] How can this be even remotely true if Apple takes a 30% commission for every sale in the App Store? [1] https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU05/20200729/110883/HHRG...

Its wily political speak. The devs keep 100% of what they make. What do they make? 70% of the price on app store. They keep 100% of the 70% of the store price. Truthful statement, just one that is designed to mislead you.

This. Plus: most apps don’t make money. It’s easy to keep 100% of zero.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#266

Post by wolco »

jbob2000 wrote: post #221
sleepydog wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is not giving a 70% refund when you refund an app. They are giving a full refund and charging the seller for the 30%. In your analogy, it would be like giving the toll back and charging a portion of it to the bridge builder.

Apple's responsibility is to the transaction. Their job as a marketplace is to make transactions happen. By making the initial transaction happen, they get their 30% cut (if you think 30% is too high, that's fine, but that's not what we're talking about here). The customer's experience is now in the developer's hands. If the experience is botched, somebody has to cover the full refund. Since the bad experience happen…

Isn't marketing Apple's job. If the message was communicated it would be upto them.

The problem is Apple doesn't need paided third party apps as much as they use to. The app store gave them runway to develop important apps internally. Big name/vendor free apps are welcome.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#267

Post by indymike »

Sargos wrote: post #116
indymike wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

App stores need competition, not regulation.

In this case the economic conditions are a monopoly so competition is impossible. That's why regulations exist, they fix market failures.

Breaking the monopoly is the solution. Pouring regulatory cement on just makes the monopoly legitimate and sanctioned forever.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#268

Post by gamblor956 »

chadlavi wrote: post #102

Payment processors generally don't refund fees on payments when the payments are refunded, this isn't new. It's remarkable mainly because (a) it's 30%, not 3% and (b) the App store doesn't position itself as a payments processor the way Stripe does, so it sounds really weird that they would act like one. If the app store took a 3% chunk and never refunded it regardless of the ongoing status of the transaction, that w…

Credit card companies (i.e., Visa, Mastercard) absolutely do refund fees on payments when the retailer processes a refund. This is why retailers generally require you to use the same method of payment to get your refund.

It's uniquely online processors that do not refund fees.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#269

Post by zodiac »

klank wrote: post #254
ralph84 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party causing economic harm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

How does that apply? In hypothetical this thread has been discussing nobody is damaging the contractual relationship itself nor is anybody preventing either company from fulfilling their contractual obligations. In fact, it's the strength and continued operation of the contractual relationship that would cause the economic harm. I don't think tortious interference applies here.

I would guess that buying an app with the intention of harming the app creator by doing a refund is against the ToS, and I think that's fair (since the purpose of the refund mechanism is to allow the buyer to change their mind for some "good faith" reason - even something like a change of mood is fine, but "to harm the creator" is obviously not)
Post reply on HN