Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning • Hacker News Board

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

#301

Post by immackay » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

AussieWog93 wrote: post #239

filoleg wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Well for that comparison to work, we'd also have to assume Microsoft disabled installing unsigned software as well. Look no further than Xbox Store and how well you can run unsigned code on it. Sure, you can buy a physical game copy, but there are two issues with that: 1. Diskless versions of consoles are becoming more commonplace, thus removing that option. 2. If you buy retail, it is still a cut to Microsoft, just…

You can actually run unsigned code on a retail Xbox One console officially. There are ports of RetroArch to it and all. I suspect this permissiveness was a major reason it was never hacked throughout its full 8 year lifespan - homebrewers didn't need to enable piracy to do what they wanted.

If installing with a developer account is official, then similarly you can run unsigned code on iOS officially. The process is quite similar to xbox.

Edit: can't reply further, but this can indeed be done for free (assuming you have access to a mac or a mac vm). The paid developer account is only for publishing to the app store, you can do almost everything with a free developer account.

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

#302

Post by defaultname » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

smnrchrds wrote: post #161

typest wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is because Netflix, knowing Apple would take 30%, does not allow you to sign up via an iPhone app. Apple takes 30% if you sign up via iPhone, not if you sign up via web and then use the iPhone app.

Netflix was able to do this because Apple carved out an exception for them by gerrymandering the rules so Netflix could do this. They did that because Netflix was powerful enough. Hey tried to do a similar thing, but Apple was having none of it. They were going to force them to pay them 30%, because they were not powerful enough. When the social media storm made them more powerful, Apple acquiesced.

Apple has always had clear exceptions for video, audio, magazine and newspaper apps.

"3.1.3(a) “Reader” Apps: Apps may allow a user to access previously purchased content or content subscriptions (specifically: magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, and video). Reader apps may offer account creation for free tiers, and account management functionality for existing customers."

It isn't because Netflix or Amazon are "powerful" enough, but that they saw that these were traditional multiplatform services.

I disagree with the ridiculous Hey situation (and note that Apple backed down), however let's be accurate.

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

#303

Post by alpacaillama » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:43 PM UTC

Apocryphon wrote: post #269

alpacaillama wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going to jump in and reply. Patreon explicitly doesn’t do Pay to views, doesn’t have interaction gated behind paywalls, and is meant as just a straight transfer of $. Fanhouse does a lot of these things which counts as digital transactions. This differentiation makes sense to me. Also interestingly most people I have seen use fanhouse use it for NFSW stuff but Stripe seems to be fine with it? Specifically the pay to…

Fanhouse is explicitly supposed to be PG-13 and a family-friendly equivalent to other similar platforms. It wouldn't have even been listed on the App Store if it wasn't.

I can find you 15 fanhouse creator tweets that are suggestive in nature. They get around the PG-13 requirement by calling it “lewd”. Do you want 13 year olds to buy lewds? Lol def not PG-13 whatever they claim. And from personal experience a creator who has offered to let me buy her nudes on fanhouse’s pay to view. I too can claim something is SFW.

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

#304

Post by kristiandupont » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:43 PM UTC

RandallBrown wrote: post #286

sangnoir wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What exemptions does Netflix have? Netflix is exempted from mandatory usage of Apple's payment platform. OP stated that Apple is threatening to pull the app if she does the same thing that Netflix gets away with: avoid using Apple's payment platform, and set up payments outside of the app. For a company that loves demanding its partners adopt Most-Favored Nation clauses, Apple sure does hate treating its app develo…

Netflix doesn't take payment in its iOS app as far as I can find. They are allowed to take payment on their website for a subscription, but so is any other developer.

>so is any other developer

No, they are not. That was what the whole Hey debacle was about. Netflix and Spotify have special privileges there.

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

#305

Post by querulous » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:44 PM UTC

somethingAlex wrote: post #94

Does anyone know to what extent Apple differentiates between in-app purchases and subscriptions? I've heard Netflix and Spotify do not give Apple 30% because, well, that'd be kind of ridiculous for these companies to give 30% of their revenue to Apple. But what about mid-sized companies? I pay a yearly subscription fee to Headspace. If Apple is actually taking 30% of their revenue because people access it via an iPho…

if you pay that subscription fee via the app store then apple takes a 30% (or possibly 15%, in a few scenarios) cut

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

#306

Post by eikenberry » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:44 PM UTC

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #198

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #107

The antitrust case against Apple is so overdue it's embarrassing. What I don't get is people who defend it. Imagine Microsoft taking 30% of every purchase you make online because you used their OS to get there. Then would the defenders admit it's an obvious abuse of a monopoly? What makes it different for Apple?

Cause Apple only has like 40% marketshare.

Anti-trust laws are about competition, not strictly about monopolies. They could be (and should be IMO) applied much more broadly.

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

#307

Post by ajmurmann » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:44 PM UTC

wvenable wrote: post #296

rib3ye wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is that it's industry standard. Microsoft and Sony also take 30% https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2021/05/07/playst...

Microsoft and Sony take 30% of game revenue. A piece of software is sold and they take a cut. They also take a cut of in app purchases of game expansions and game items. Apple, on the other hand, wants to take a cut of every non-physical item purchase on their platform regardless of what it is. They also don't want any non-physical item purchases to occur off their platform. Unlike Microsoft and Sony, Apple's platfor…

I don't think I see the difference in what you are describing Sony does vs Apple does. What's the non-physical items sold on PlayStation that Sony doesn't take a cut for?

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

#308

Post by alpacaillama » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:45 PM UTC

hu3 wrote: post #265

alpacaillama wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going to jump in and reply. Patreon explicitly doesn’t do Pay to views, doesn’t have interaction gated behind paywalls, and is meant as just a straight transfer of $. Fanhouse does a lot of these things which counts as digital transactions. This differentiation makes sense to me. Also interestingly most people I have seen use fanhouse use it for NFSW stuff but Stripe seems to be fine with it? Specifically the pay to…

Interesting. Doesn't Apple disallow porn? Also Patreon does gate content behind payment, with different tiers even. And I've seen Patreons sell one-time services/products for a fee, like this random Patreon: https://i.imgur.com/qKpOwpq.png All these subtle differentiations to justify one service paying 30% while Patreon doesn't seem arbitrary to say the least. It makes no sense.

I agree with your point about the differentiation being vague and the fact that apple should be more clear.

Also apple does disallow porn. And fanhouse also says no porn but every fanhouse creator’s marketing is around suggestive pics. They get around it by calling it “lewd” instead of nude and the app literally has a pay to view picture functionality which some creators use for NSFW stuff. I wonder when Stripe will catch on to this. Basically marketing != what’s happening.

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

#309

Post by querulous » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:45 PM UTC

RandallBrown wrote: post #286

sangnoir wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What exemptions does Netflix have? Netflix is exempted from mandatory usage of Apple's payment platform. OP stated that Apple is threatening to pull the app if she does the same thing that Netflix gets away with: avoid using Apple's payment platform, and set up payments outside of the app. For a company that loves demanding its partners adopt Most-Favored Nation clauses, Apple sure does hate treating its app develo…

Netflix doesn't take payment in its iOS app as far as I can find. They are allowed to take payment on their website for a subscription, but so is any other developer.

the twitter thread/verge article are about how this is not true for fanhouse, at the very least.

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

#310

Post by symlinkk » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 10:45 PM UTC

Aerroon wrote: post #79

vbezhenar wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit allows pornography in the app if you've chosen NSFW setting. How OnlyFans is different?

Because Reddit is old and big. Banning it would piss off lots of people. It's the same reason why Chrome, Safari, Firefox etc can get away with it, despite clearly having accessible NSFW content.

This is the real reason. Notice that there’s no real 4chan app on the App Store, even though it has both SFW and NSFW boards, just like Reddit. Apple will bend their own rules depending on who they’re applying them to, they have zero integrity.