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

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

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

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

#941

Post by musicale »

zamadatix wrote: post #214
judge2020 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add, I'm not sure what legal basis there is for "you're charging too much". My only guess is filing against Apple and Google jointly for being a duopoly, but Epic has made it extremely hard to do something like this because of their existing jury trial against Google which gives a lot of concessions to third-party app stores in terms of functionality.

"You're charging too much" seems unlikely to be the actual argument presented though. Something along the lines of the scare message, still not actually allowing it to be handled via in app flow like a first party payment, and intentionally making a 3rd party choice potentially impossible to compete vs a 1st party choice by arguably hiding part of the processing fee margin in the overall fee would be the kinds of arg…

> Epic's goal here isn't about whether Apple charges 99% or 1%

Epic's goal is to pay lower platform fees to Apple and Google, presumably lower than the (30%?) platform fees they pay to Nintendo.

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

#942

Post by woutr_be »

jijji wrote: post #264

And Apple wonders why Android has 70% market share (and growing)

Do you have a source for the growing numbers? On all accounts it seems to have plateaued, and even slightly down in the past 5 years - https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ios-vs-android-market-s...

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

#943

Post by [deleted] »

musicale wrote: post #941
zamadatix wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You're charging too much" seems unlikely to be the actual argument presented though. Something along the lines of the scare message, still not actually allowing it to be handled via in app flow like a first party payment, and intentionally making a 3rd party choice potentially impossible to compete vs a 1st party choice by arguably hiding part of the processing fee margin in the overall fee would be the kinds of arg…

> Epic's goal here isn't about whether Apple charges 99% or 1% Epic's goal is to pay lower platform fees to Apple and Google, presumably lower than the (30%?) platform fees they pay to Nintendo.

[deleted]

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

#944

Post by AnthonyMouse »

kelnos wrote: post #474
threeseed wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will be interesting to see Epic file a lawsuit questioning the legality of per-sale licensing models for SDKs. You know given they charge exactly the same way for Unreal Engine.

Doesn't sound interesting at all, as the two matters are unrelated. Apple isn't charging for use of the iOS platform SDKs; the developer agreement is much more vague and weasely about what they're charging for, being the developer's "agent and/or commisionaire". Per-sale licensing for a copyrighted (or patented) work is pretty normal and done in many industries. Apple's agreement doesn't specify any fees for licensin…

Moreover, if they would actually admit what they were nominally charging for then someone could create a third party implementation of whatever that is, people would want to be able to use that instead of paying the fee, and what is their excuse supposed to be then?

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

#945

Post by AnthonyMouse »

dwaite wrote: post #549
jonhohle wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, as much as I defend Apple against the “they have a monopoly on the iPhone” crowd, this seems worse than the original restrictions. People have been buying stuff online for decades. There’s no new security issue at play here. Taking a commission from a company that’s already paying for payment processing can’t possibly be seen as reasonable. How are they even going to attempt to enforce compliance. Is every stor…

> ... this seems worse than the original restrictions. This is worse from the original restrictions _specifically_ because the original restrictions were chosen to simplify from this sort of scenario. If Apple says all app purchases and purchases of digital goods/services within the app are subject to the 15/30%, and those payments are always made through Apple, then Apple can check for non-compliance with the contra…

> Regulators can say that you can't block other companies from the "iPhone in-app payment for digital goods" market without being anti-competitive, but it is much more onerous to force a company to continue to provide a set of services (maintaining developer tools and SDKs, reviewing and signing binaries, providing backward compatibility in new OS versions) but for a fee schedule determined by regulators.

A rather obvious thing they could do is just prohibit the fee from being a percent of the developer's revenue. If Apple wants to charge everyone $1000 for a copy of Xcode and the iOS SDK, go to town. But then, people should be able to make competing developer tools and SDKs for iOS, and have competing stores where someone other than Apple is doing the reviews etc.

The main issue isn't even what they're charging, it's that they constrain you from using the alternatives that would induce them to charge less via competitive pressure.

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

#946

Post by AnthonyMouse »

SllX wrote: post #400
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 nig…

It’s not that difficult to follow. As I recall, and feel free to correct me on the chronology if I get something out of order, it went something like this: - Epic pushed an update to Fortnite at some point to the App Store that would allow them to issue an update from the server side to enable a flag to offer Epic’s own payment processor where you could buy in-game currency from them instead of IAP. They then issued…

> So how can Epic now argue that they have standing for harm caused by Apple’s plan for compliance that affect the way they do business with developers in their developer program when they are no longer in Apple’s developer program?

Maybe they want to be the competing payment processor for third party developers who are in Apple's developer program, but don't have the resources to litigate against Apple themselves.

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

#947

Post by andsoitis »

danenania wrote: post #63
MBCook wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft had like 95% of the market. Apple has 50%. Courts have already ruled they’re not a monopoly. Epic asked the Supreme Court to look at that again and they specifically decided not to and to leave the decision in place. That’s why Apple can do what they’re (now, post order) doing legally and Microsoft couldn’t.

iOS and Android taken together are clearly a monopoly though. So call it a cartel or duopoly with price fixing if you like rather than a monopoly. It's exactly the kind of situation that antitrust laws were created to prevent.

> iOS and Android taken together are clearly a monopoly though.

That's deceptive language that undermines your argument.

A monopoly is a market with the "absence of competition", creating a situation where a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular thing.

If you said "duopoly" your argument would be more easily entertained or if you said "cartel". However, neither of these two characterizations stand up to scrutiny either.

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

#948

Post by FateOfNations »

throw03172019 wrote: post #324

Are there any details of how Apple actually collects that money? Self reporting? Only Apple Pay? What’s the process like?

Self-reporting. The developer will pay Apple periodically and is agrees to be subject to audit to verify compliance.

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

#949

Post by andsoitis »

sangnoir wrote: post #896
judge2020 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add, I'm not sure what legal basis there is for "you're charging too much". My only guess is filing against Apple and Google jointly for being a duopoly, but Epic has made it extremely hard to do something like this because of their existing jury trial against Google which gives a lot of concessions to third-party app stores in terms of functionality.

> To add, I'm not sure what legal basis there is for "you're charging too much" Anti-price-gauging laws have already been ruled as constitutional, so there is case law for "You're charging too much"

> Anti-price-gauging laws

Price gauging has a very particular meaning; it isn't simply a subjective "you're charging too much".

It is the practice of significantly increasing the prices of goods, services, or commodities during a time of crisis or high demand. This can happen when there is a sudden shortage of a product, like during a natural disaster, or when there is a surge in demand, like for popular concert tickets.

Characteristics of price gauging include:

- unconscionable prices

- taking advantage of a crisis

- limited supply or high demand

In the United States price gouging is illegal after a state of emergency has been declared.

You can read more here: https://oag.ca.gov/consumers/pricegougingduringdisasters

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

#950

Post by joshuamorton »

BobaFloutist wrote: post #818
dwaite wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has been the style of argument made to regulators so far. However then people get shocked that Apple says ok, we've rolled out the ability for third party app stores, we still review all the apps before signing, and the store owes us a 20% commission.

Which is, in this context, like Amazon taking 9% if you buy something from Ebay.

> like Amazon taking 9% if you buy something from Ebay.

If it's shipped via Amazon.

Post reply on HN