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

EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 825 posts

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#271

Post by defaultname »

ericmay wrote: post #162
megatron4537 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this 30%-15% only for Spotify subscribers that paid through Apple Pay or is this for all Spotify subscribers that use the iOS app?

If you sign up for Spotify outside of the app then Apple sees 0 of that revenue. And yet they are then also hosting and distributing apps for these companies. I think they’ll probably start charging companies like Spotify a banana amount of money to be on the App Store or on iOS at all if they lose these legal battles. I think the pull of the iPhone is far stronger than any app and there are many developers waiting f…

Every major app that iOS missed would be a significant dollar amount of sales that Apple would lose. If Netflix or Spotify or PrimeVideo wasn't available on iOS, not only would that be a marketing disaster, it would yield sales consequences. This ignores the catastrophic regulatory consequences they are already poised to incur.

Apple runs the app store for users (people like me who in aggregate have made it the most valuable company in the world), and it is simply bizarre seeing these claims like it's some enormous expense that they're doing because they're benevolent (which is quite clearly the foundation of your comment, given the claim that Apple could charge "banana" amounts just for being on the app store, contrary to reality where they're already under enormous scrutiny for claiming these fees as a payment processor).

There is an argument that Apple could charge some fee for their expenses of operating the app repository. Those fees, to avoid the regulatory hammer, would be absolutely tiny compared to what they are currently getting from their take.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#272

Post by gambiting »

endisneigh wrote: post #141
gambiting wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's irrelevant. EU has already ruled previously that if you, as a company, reach more than 10% of EU's population(about 30M people) then no, you can no longer get away with just saying "my platform, my rules". The easiest way to think about it is - John wants to sell Mark a product that works on Mark's iphone. Currently, John cannot do that without a) getting explicit permission from Apple b) giving Apple a substa…

I see if that’s the rule then I support it. I await the end of percentage fees and hope all >10% platforms open up. By the way you have a link to that law ?

I believe this has already passed into law, but admittedly I cannot find the specific link saying so. Here's the law anyway:

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_...

"Platforms that reach more than 10% of the EU's population (45 million users) are considered systemic in nature, and are subject not only to specific obligations to control their own risks, but also to a new oversight structure. This new accountability framework will be comprised of a board of national Digital Services Coordinators, with special powers for the Commission in supervising very large platforms including the ability to sanction them directly."

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#273

Post by phlo »

laurent92 wrote: post #234
mrep wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With that accounting methodology, between the 30% apple store cut and the 70% music publishers cut, Apple music is left with no revenue whatsoever to fund their service, therefore running it at a 100% loss and thus price dumping which is also illegal.

But this is an excellent accounting methodology then: Each sub-business should run as a separate business. It picks my interest: Companies internally run as communist economies, all resources are merged and shared, employees are not individually associated with a revenue because the group is worth more than its sum, on the outer, liberal economy. At what size / on which criteria should a group inside a company be con…

Since you mentioned that this piques your interest: There is an body of research and literature about this topic. The Theory of the Firm [0] is a good starting point.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_firm

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#274

Post by Jcowell »

solarkraft wrote: post #133
simion314 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They cut the 30% tax down in some cases(I am still waiting for the fanboys to admit that this would never had happened if not for the large number of investigations running). Next will probably give to EU guys a convoluted way to unlock you phone but will shame you for it, probably put a watermark on a screen that you are a communist or pedo if you use the unlock device feature. Apple needs a Microsoft moment, a mome…

> Next will probably give to EU guys a convoluted way to unlock you phone This is the end game. Jailbreaking should be a supported feature. What they'll actually do is most likely expanding features for side-loading with enterprise certificates, improving solutions like Alt Store.

I disagree with supported. I think jailbreaking is in good place right now. No company should be force to fix phones that we cause harm to due to breaking into, but companies should also not be allowed to claim that that alone is the reason a product is broken without evidence.

I can’t imagine being forced to support a misuse of a product I develop outside of the scope Of it’s advertised intentions if it directly leads to the products deterioration.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#275

Post by simion314 »

simonh wrote: post #167
ericmay wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the topic has been beat to death a million times, the danger is that adding additional app stores will result in decreases in the exact thing the OP likes the App Store for. All of the hard work fighting for privacy, security, etc., goes out the window. Facebook will put their app on a 3rd party store and now we’re back to them and others abusing privacy and tracking users and not sharing what and how they’re trac…

Exactly, I like the fact that if Facebook want to be on my phone they have to meet Apple's security and privacy standards. That directly benefits me, and it's one of the reasons I buy iPhones. Forcing Apple to change their product to allow side loading and alternative stores takes that away from me.

The standards could be in the SDK and the sandbox. Like you don't allow location data or access to photos to any apo (not even Apple ones). So even if I sideload an app or start a Apple app I should get same prompts("Do you want to let this app ignore your firewall rules? This might be insecure The app dev is "Facebook/Apple/Unkown) .

And if Apple does not like Facebook tracking people maybe they should lobby for anti-tracking laws. They should also not allow lootboxes, gems or other gaming related shit (to be consistent with their puritanical PR spin)

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#276

Post by jgwil2 »

mrep wrote: post #168
slver wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So then if Apple Music internally pays 30% to App Store, we're all good by this definition.

With that accounting methodology, between the 30% apple store cut and the 70% music publishers cut, Apple music is left with no revenue whatsoever to fund their service, therefore running it at a 100% loss and thus price dumping which is also illegal.

I think dumping is only illegal in the context of international trade. Not sure of the nuances but operating at a loss certainly isn't illegal in most contexts.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#277

Post by simion314 »

d1sxeyes wrote: post #246
simonh wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, I like the fact that if Facebook want to be on my phone they have to meet Apple's security and privacy standards. That directly benefits me, and it's one of the reasons I buy iPhones. Forcing Apple to change their product to allow side loading and alternative stores takes that away from me.

The question really is do you think that it's fair to expect app developers to meet the criteria and then pay the Apple tax? To be clear, I'm not decided on my opinion yet, I can see merits on both sides of the argument.

Maybe we need to consider users, they are the larger number of victims. Should information be hidden from them? Should the user not decide if the wants to be tracked? Should the user not be allowed to donate to a developer without giving Apple a big cut?

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#278

Post by stby »

harywilke wrote: post #206
zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

narrator voice: they all used apple infrastructure.

... because they had to

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#279

Post by swiley »

endisneigh wrote: post #135
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most businesses must have mobile apps of some kind, and must support the two biggest options, iPhone and Android. So even if you don't own an iPhone, as a business owner there's a good chance you must make an iPhone app. Also, the entire web has to maintain Safari compatibility because iOS devices can only browse via Safari's engine. Ironically, this is the only thing protecting us from a complete Chrome monopoly...…

Most businesses don’t need mobile app - the entire basis of your argument is based off a false premise.

If there isn't a native client for iOS for a chat protocol then no one will use it. Apple has distorted chat over the internet so severely that there are many people who say they pick who they date partly based on whether or not they use iMessage for chat.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#280

Post by endisneigh »

simion314 wrote: post #255
endisneigh wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of businesses have no app presence. I honestly don’t understand. In no way are Apple devices and electricity access comparable. Phone ecosystems come and go - energy access is forever.

Why should a percentage of businesses be relevant? If I want to deliver food can I ask my customers to use a Linux PC because I only have a Linux app? Can you tell your customers that your website only works on Safari? As a company you have to implement what the customers want, not what you want. Apple controlling the market means you have to (even if you are not forced by a law of nature) make sure your webiste work…

> If I want to deliver food can I ask my customers to use a Linux PC because I only have a Linux app? Can you tell your customers that your website only works on Safari?

Sure why not?

Businesses don’t have to do anything. They can and do support things arbitrarily and customers choose which business to engage with based off those decisions.

Apple and Google are following the same rules. Hopefully those rules change, but I doubt it.

Post reply on HN