US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission • Hacker News Board

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#351

Post by lolinder » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:20 AM UTC

radley wrote: post #39

There's a strong chance this will be shot down as "bad-faith" compliance. Rumor is Epic will quickly contest it [Update: confirmed] https://twitter.com/timsweeneyepic/status/174740814726057173...

What exactly is bad faith about this compliance? The original ruling specifically called out that Apple would still be entitled to a commission even if people used alternative payment processors.

The main thing that feels icky to me is the hurdles to getting approved to link to alternative payment methods, but even if those are walked back that doesn't solve the main issue, which is that alternative payment providers were never a sensible solution to Apple's tax.

Apple has always argued that the commission is for the App Store, not for payment processing, and it is only collected through their payment processor as a matter of convenience. The policy announced here is essentially the same that they announced two years ago in the Netherlands in response to a similar ruling [0]. I'm surprised that anyone here is surprised that they're doing the same thing in the US.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30204604

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#352

Post by paholg » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:21 AM UTC

sircastor wrote: post #293

choppaface wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But use of said IP is required because Apple forbids side-loading. Therefore Apple App store is a monopoly. So hopefully the court result will in the end help get the Apple App store shut down / opened up.

Some people think of the App Store as a bazaar that Apple runs on its property, and it’s a 15-30% charge to setup a tent and sell your wares. Others think of it as Apple’s general store where they carry your app as a product, and you pay 15-30% for a place on the shelf. The concept that Kroger (for instance) has a monopoly of customers in its own store is ridiculous. There are other stores, and other bazaars. What an…

How about if you go to purchase a house, but one of the HoA agreements is that you only shop at Kroger.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#353

Post by newZWhoDis » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:26 AM UTC

judge2020 wrote: post #75

radley wrote: post #39

There's a strong chance this will be shot down as "bad-faith" compliance. Rumor is Epic will quickly contest it [Update: confirmed] https://twitter.com/timsweeneyepic/status/174740814726057173...

It'll probably need to be another lawsuit since it's in the developer agreement. Via user lolinder ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39020745 ): > Apple is already pretty clear in its developer agreement [0] that the 30% commission is for "its services as Your agent and/or commissionaire" (Schedule 2 3.4), not for its services as a payment processor. They are contractually allowed to take the 30% fee out of paym…

>Yvonne-Gonzalez was skeptical of the 30% fee during the trial, and in the ruling she was suspicious about Apple's justification of the commission, writing that "the 30% is not tied to anything in particular and can be changed," but did not order Apple to do so.

We really do live in clown world

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#354

Post by riscy » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:27 AM UTC

infotainment wrote: post #323

sircastor wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people think of the App Store as a bazaar that Apple runs on its property, and it’s a 15-30% charge to setup a tent and sell your wares. Others think of it as Apple’s general store where they carry your app as a product, and you pay 15-30% for a place on the shelf. The concept that Kroger (for instance) has a monopoly of customers in its own store is ridiculous. There are other stores, and other bazaars. What an…

Not OP, but sticking with your store analogies, I would use the following: Apple represents the town government, and the App Store is the only general store in the entire town; other stores have been banned. Don't like it? You're free to pack up and move to another city! The reason I'd characterize it this way is that changing phone platforms is nontrivial. It's not as simple as just going to another store that day.

> The reason I'd characterize it this way is that changing phone platforms is nontrivial.

I'm sorry, but how is it "nontrivial" to change phone platforms? Google says it's easy and all you need is a cable to get the best experience: https://www.android.com/switch-to-android/

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#355

Post by semiquaver » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:28 AM UTC

David_FF wrote: post #335

Maybe I missed it But how will they actually know how much money developers are making via external web purchasing? Audits? In my opinion working with both Apple and Google's billing libraries is pretty painful. Many developers use third parties to make it easier like Qonversion or RevenueCat. These all have to go through Apple and Google respectively If you can just have a web page to do it, that seems easier actual…

  > Developers are required to provide a periodic accounting of qualifying out-of-app purchases, and Apple has a right to audit developers' accounting to ensure compliance with their commission obligations and to charge interest and offset payments.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#356

Post by Sargos » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:28 AM UTC

sircastor wrote: post #293

choppaface wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But use of said IP is required because Apple forbids side-loading. Therefore Apple App store is a monopoly. So hopefully the court result will in the end help get the Apple App store shut down / opened up.

Some people think of the App Store as a bazaar that Apple runs on its property, and it’s a 15-30% charge to setup a tent and sell your wares. Others think of it as Apple’s general store where they carry your app as a product, and you pay 15-30% for a place on the shelf. The concept that Kroger (for instance) has a monopoly of customers in its own store is ridiculous. There are other stores, and other bazaars. What an…

Apple's App Store is more akin to a Company Store[1] where you live in a town owned by the company you are utilizing for your lifestyle and their store is the only place you have available to shop. It was a scandal in the past as it's unfair to consumers while also being unfair to producers. The argument of "well you can just move/buy a different phone" did not hold up very well with society.

This unethical model is not any better in our modern world.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_store

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#357

Post by lolinder » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:28 AM UTC

newZWhoDis wrote: post #353

judge2020 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll probably need to be another lawsuit since it's in the developer agreement. Via user lolinder ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39020745 ): > Apple is already pretty clear in its developer agreement [0] that the 30% commission is for "its services as Your agent and/or commissionaire" (Schedule 2 3.4), not for its services as a payment processor. They are contractually allowed to take the 30% fee out of paym…

>Yvonne-Gonzalez was skeptical of the 30% fee during the trial, and in the ruling she was suspicious about Apple's justification of the commission, writing that "the 30% is not tied to anything in particular and can be changed," but did not order Apple to do so. We really do live in clown world

She basically signaled that she wished she could do something about it but that Epic didn't challenge the 30%, they challenged the existence of a commission at all. Epic overreached and she can't just make up a judgement about things that haven't actually been brought before her.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#358

Post by pathartl » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:30 AM UTC

paholg wrote: post #352

sircastor wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people think of the App Store as a bazaar that Apple runs on its property, and it’s a 15-30% charge to setup a tent and sell your wares. Others think of it as Apple’s general store where they carry your app as a product, and you pay 15-30% for a place on the shelf. The concept that Kroger (for instance) has a monopoly of customers in its own store is ridiculous. There are other stores, and other bazaars. What an…

How about if you go to purchase a house, but one of the HoA agreements is that you only shop at Kroger.

And the only roads in and out of your neighborhood leads directly to a Kroger. And there's barbed wire fencing surrounding your neighborhood. Meanwhile, deliveries being made to Kroger from distributors may only use Kroger-branded trucks, which cost at least 20% more. Oh, and that truck may only be serviced by Kroger-approved mechanics. Those mechanics can only buy parts from Kroger. Any totaled truck can't be parted out by mechanics and MUST be recertified by Kroger.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#359

Post by Dylan16807 » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:32 AM UTC

riscy wrote: post #354

infotainment wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but sticking with your store analogies, I would use the following: Apple represents the town government, and the App Store is the only general store in the entire town; other stores have been banned. Don't like it? You're free to pack up and move to another city! The reason I'd characterize it this way is that changing phone platforms is nontrivial. It's not as simple as just going to another store that day.

> The reason I'd characterize it this way is that changing phone platforms is nontrivial. I'm sorry, but how is it "nontrivial" to change phone platforms? Google says it's easy and all you need is a cable to get the best experience: https://www.android.com/switch-to-android/

Do you believe them?

You shouldn't. It's a marketing page.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#360

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:34 AM UTC

SllX wrote: post #146

radley wrote: post #39

There's a strong chance this will be shot down as "bad-faith" compliance. Rumor is Epic will quickly contest it [Update: confirmed] https://twitter.com/timsweeneyepic/status/174740814726057173...

I’m not sure Epic actually has standing anymore. They did back when they were part of the developer program. If they can make their case that it is bad faith compliance as part of their original case before the Court goes “c’ya, we’re done here”, they might have something, but Apple revoked Epic’s membership for violating their terms in the developer program worldwide and at the conclusion of this lawsuit, Apple has…

IANAL, but at face value, that seems like it would be, well, quite insane? To emphasize, I've seen plenty of insane stuff in the legal system, but if the argument is basically that Epic doesn't have standing because Apple won't let them be in a position where they could have standing, yet they generally offer that position (dev program membership) to the public at large, that seems like some sort of Catch-22-ish nightmare.

Again, little surprises me in the legal system these days, but I have to think courts would be very skeptical of an argument where a potential defendant controls the gates that decide whether a potential plaintiff has standing.