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

Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 627 posts

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#201

Post by [deleted] »

simondotau wrote: post #29
bubblethink wrote: post #12

Is there a better source and the text of the law ? Payment systems are a proxy for the fee since there isn't an explicit publishing fee. It would be quite straightforward for both Apple and Google to charge a publishing fee, which may end up close to the current rent. The larger issue is that there aren't alternative app stores. Apple doesn't allow them at all, and Google severely restricts them at the technical and…

According to the FSF, the distribution of a binary computer program which substantially relies upon GPL libraries is considered a derivative work and would require you to abide by the terms of the GPL license. Similarly, an iOS app which substantially relies upon (and must be compiled with) Apple's libraries in order to work is subject to whatever the terms Apple includes in their software license. Of course Apple is…

[deleted]

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#202

Post by commoner »

perryizgr8 wrote: post #130
commoner wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, Airbnb does have strict anti-steering rules just like Apple and Google do. Several lines from their off-platform policy: > In order to protect our community and business, the following behaviors are prohibited: > Taking people off of the Airbnb platform for new, partial, or future bookings > Contacting potential guests prior to booking on Airbnb to move the booking off of Airbnb (ex: offering discounts to b…

I get that. But what will they do? I can still flout their rules. Problem with iOS is that I can't do what I want with the hardware I paid for.

Airbnb can ban you from their platform. This is more of a problem for hosts (since Airbnb dominates the "home-sharing" market) than for guests (who have plenty of hotel and vacation rental options).

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#203

Post by mbesto »

mrtksn wrote: post #124
Vespasian wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your app might only be targeted at a single country or a single market with "easy" taxation rules across borders like the EU. Companies do that all the time and if they see the value of being available globally by paying apple 30% that's fine as well. However right now we don't know whether such a service is in fact worth 30% percent because Google and Apple effectively prevent a competitor from offering lower prices

Obviously everyone can do whatever they like, I am pointing out the burden this puts on smaller developers. Suddenly, creating and distributing apps can get prohibitive for smaller developers.

> I am pointing out the burden this puts on smaller developers.

This already existed. You're saying that the 30% was to cover this burden, but what other people are pointing out is that this 30% isn't necessarily a true market cost of doing business since there was never another option. There is nothing stopping another entity (Stripe or otherwise) from providing a service that covers this burden similar to Apple. If it happens to cost 30% then so be it, but we don't truly know the cost because its effectively a monopolistic economic arrangement provided by Apple.

> Suddenly, creating and distributing apps can get prohibitive for smaller developers.

How so? It's not effected distribution. Apple will still provide an option for a 30% cut. If more devs go to another option then Apple may compete and this 30% may even go down. This is a good thing for the consumer and the developer.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#204

Post by moomin »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #79
stirlo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can all agree that transfer pricing and the Double Irish Dutch sandwich were not intended to be used in the way they have been by modern multinationals.

What is stopping the governments from changing the laws to make it illegal? I do not understand the concept of expecting an entity to pay taxes they are not liable for paying.

Think of it like an invasive and experimental medical treatment. You know the disease is there, but a lot of the changes you could make would damage good tissue as well as the bad.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#205

Post by howinteresting »

simondotau wrote: post #54
Hamuko wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's their code, it's up to them. Well, until the regulators step in (again).

Are you suggesting that regulators can force Apple to give away their stuff for free if they want to participate in that market? That doesn't sound right to me.

Yes, regulators can do that, and they would have pretty clear antitrust grounds to do it as well.

The difference between random people using the GPL and Apple is that Apple is worth a trillion dollars. That matters quite a bit.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#206

Post by mafuy »

dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #197
stirlo wrote: post #4

Finally. This is exactly how regulators should respond to the market abuse of these technology monopolies. If they wanted to head this off all they had to do was pay a reasonable amount of tax in the country where the revenue was generated and offer a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. They chose not to so they reap what they sow

I very much agree that this app stores market abuse thing needs to end, and I am also really glad to see that at least one country is responding like this. > a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. I want to point out, though, that the service Apple provides is not merely payment processing. They offer total customer management. Which, when integrated with their entire developer offering (Test…

I agree that Apple's system adds a lot of value. And that's why I believe it can and should compete with other systems. There should be no problem with informing users about other payment options both in- and outside of an app. But Apple chose to forbid this. And that's not ok.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#207

Post by ehsankia »

dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #197
stirlo wrote: post #4

Finally. This is exactly how regulators should respond to the market abuse of these technology monopolies. If they wanted to head this off all they had to do was pay a reasonable amount of tax in the country where the revenue was generated and offer a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. They chose not to so they reap what they sow

I very much agree that this app stores market abuse thing needs to end, and I am also really glad to see that at least one country is responding like this. > a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. I want to point out, though, that the service Apple provides is not merely payment processing. They offer total customer management. Which, when integrated with their entire developer offering (Test…

Sure but the point is that developers should have the option of rolling out their own solution if they don't need all the features Apple provides or agree with the fee. This in turn creates competition which may reduce rates all around.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#208

Post by zaarn »

simondotau wrote: post #167
illuminated wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The text mentions developers, not just users... I assume (by understanding the published text) they'd (Korean officials) want to target any users of apps published by Korean developers, no matter the location.

Korean law cannot reach into sales performed in another country—at least not without some fairly tenuous moves. Apple's phone market share in South Korea is a moderately healthy 22% given the presence of strong domestic and regional brands, but I've no doubt Apple would sooner give up on South Korea altogether than have a weird law tying their hands globally.

They can't but the korean developer has a relationship with Google or Apple that the government can reach.

If Google forbade a korean dev from making an international app with external payment provider, then SK could very much punish Google SK for it. Doesn't matter if the target users are in Europe. Read the GDPR, same principle.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#209

Post by cletus »

Good.

I've been saying this awhile, most notably when Apple (of course followed by Google) introduced a discount on commission for smaller developers.

This is completely backwards.

I know why they did it. They wanted some positive PR that didn't cost them anything. Thing is, it's the larger publishers who are going to lobby regulators and challenge things in court. It's those same publishers who already have their own payment processing systems where the 30% is pure overhead (minus the CC fees). Small publishers actually get a lot of benefit for that 30% (IMHO).

So what Apple/Google should've done is give larger publishers a volume discount. Of course this should force them into binding arbitration and otherwise challenging the discount should void that discount.

Why? Because it changes the calculus for Epic, etc. Currently that is:

Option 1: Keep paying 30%

Option 2: Leave the app store

Option 3: Challenge the 30% cut in court

Game theory will tell you that there is essentially no downside to (3). Worst case you will be back on the app store at 30% or will leave.

But what if the options were:

Option 1: Keep a volume discount and pay 10%

Option 2: Leave

Option 3: Challenge the cut and possibly end up paying 30% or leaving

Now they have something to lose.

More importantly, it takes the sting out of efforts to lobby regulators because now we're talking about the difference between 1-2% (CC fees at volume) and 10% not 30%.

I stand by my position that end users don't actually want competing third-party app stores. That's just a usability nightmare. But backend payment processing is something else entirely and is the likely first step in breaking the stranglehold.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#210

Post by mbesto »

mrtksn wrote: post #108
stirlo wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but there will be more gatekeepers to deal with. They’re not mandating support for alternative payment providers merely saying Apple and Google cannot prevent you as a developer offering an alternative to your users. Whether you decide to support alternatives is up to you but when you can use stripe for a 2% fee or Apple/Google with 30% how can you be worse off?

No one mandates to support AppStore or Google Play in first place. That's something you do if you want to reach the users of that service.

From the article:

> require in-app purchases

You need to bifurcate the payment % from the selling of the app itself and the in-app purchase.

For iOS, the AppStore is essentially mandated to download and sign an iOS app. No one is saying that you shouldn't have some cost associated with getting that distribution (since Apple is providing value there), it's more about the cut they take for every additional fees once the app is already downloaded.

Post reply on HN