Live data from Hacker News

Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

twitter.com

21–30 of 593 posts

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#21
post #19

Seems pretty disingenuous given they had to have known this would happen (note that OnlyFans has no app)

Then why do Venmo and CashApp get a pass? Is Fanhouse trying to leverage Apple’s Payment APIs without paying or something?

Those apps are not distributing content, I haven’t installed Fanhouse but from looking at their website it seems that you can consume the content you’re paying for through it.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#22

Seriously curious, what percentage is “fair”? Or is the issue you can’t side load this app without going through the App Store?

Well, Google charges 30%. Microsoft (for the XBox, not sure about their store) 30%. Sony (PS4) 30%. Steam was 30%, but this is dropping. Nintendo's is well protected by NDAs, but reportedly 15-30%.

30% is pretty close to a standard when you're providing the storefront and control the hardware.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#24
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why do Venmo and CashApp get a pass? Is Fanhouse trying to leverage Apple’s Payment APIs without paying or something?

Those apps are not distributing content, I haven’t installed Fanhouse but from looking at their website it seems that you can consume the content you’re paying for through it.

So Netflix?

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#25
Serious question, why does everything require an app? Why can't the same thing be accomplished via the mobile web? I get so tired of being prompted to install apps when you could just *show me the damned web page*. Anything that requires speed can be done via webassembly, and sure, anything like games can ship a native app.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#26

Serious question, why does everything require an app? Why can't the same thing be accomplished via the mobile web? I get so tired of being prompted to install apps when you could just *show me the damned web page*. Anything that requires speed can be done via webassembly, and sure, anything like games can ship a native app.

Usually for proper push messaging and background processing

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#27
post #19

Seems pretty disingenuous given they had to have known this would happen (note that OnlyFans has no app)

Then why do Venmo and CashApp get a pass? Is Fanhouse trying to leverage Apple’s Payment APIs without paying or something?

> Then why do Venmo and CashApp get a pass?

Don't give Apple any ideas. Next thing you know, they start charging you 30% of each transaction and are working on a way to send you an invoice for 30% of any transactions you do in real life.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#28

Seems pretty disingenuous given they had to have known this would happen (note that OnlyFans has no app)

OnlyFans wouldn't be allowed in the App Store since it is essentially pornography. I am curious if they would given the chance, but they can't

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#29

Seriously curious, what percentage is “fair”? Or is the issue you can’t side load this app without going through the App Store?

The issue is that Apple continues to inroad services and tools through their own proprietary systems, which gives them a better excuse to mark up their products. Giving users the choice of marketplaces gives Apple incentive to stay competitive in an otherwise monopolistic software segment.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#30
Per https://fanhouse.app/, "Fanhouse is the place where creators can monetize their social media personalities by posting freely about their lives, like a finsta, close friends story, or private alt, while connecting and engaging with their top fans."

So they built a platform, where they take some cut for themselves, while allowing other people to sell some digital contents on their platform. Apple built a platform, where they take some cut for themselves, while allowing other people to sell digital contents on their platform.

Other than the argument that this could be an anti-trust situation (i.e. in that case, the argument would be that Apple is abusing their market position), what differentiates these two cases ?

Post reply on HN