Step in the right direction which US politicians fail to do, since they are all paid off by the usual suspects . . . .
Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
71–80 of 627 posts
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#72When the EU does the same things will turn for real.
and they can, because there's not a single EU company with an app store to harm. App stores are designed for profit, not simply for our convenience. Imagine a government forcing AirBnb to let people pay hand to hand to the owner of the apartment. It's the same issue, right?
It more like if airbnb could somehow prevent competitors (say oxigenbnb) from reaching the internet.
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#73Finally. 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
> 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 Like a donation? Or are these companies evading tax laws?
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.
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not exactly a publishing fee, but today you have to pay Apple $99/year to distribute software into Apple’s ecosystem; otherwise they’ll hide your application behind a non-obvious ctrl+click+run flow. To my knowledge, this fee is collected regardless of your distribution channel. I wouldn’t call $99/year “not paying.”
The $99/year gives you additional developer tools and access to the App Store storefront. It's up to Apple what constitutes a sufficient license fee for the commercial use of Apple's proprietary software libraries. Apple's libraries are licensed to developers under whatever license Apple chooses. They could require a certain revenue share regardless of which payment gateway is used. Heck, they could license it under…
I’m not sure I agree. In order to distribute my Electron app to Mac users via a direct download from my website, I must pay Apple $99. Otherwise Apple will present my users with a scare dialogue that gives the impression the software can’t be run.
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the people down-voting this, I realise that my post espouses a controversial opinion for Hacker News. But could you please explain what you disagree with?
> which substantially relies upon GPL libraries is considered a derivative work and would be a GPL violation if it's distributed without source code. I didn't vote either way, but I'm not sure that this is the way the GPL works. As I understand it, you can distribute only binaries as long as you supply _on request_ the source code. FWIW the link to the GPL reads as quite tenuous and what I would guess the downvotes w…
Thank you, I did err in how I described the GPL. I have edited my post to correct this.
> FWIW the link to the GPL reads as quite tenuous
The link is that any developer—whether they're Linus Torvalds or Apple Inc—should be allowed to choose the terms in which they release their copyrightable works into the public.
• One developer could choose the GPL.
• Another developer could choose a license which requires a flat, one-off fee.
• Yet another developer could chose a license that is free up front but mandates a revenue share under certain conditions, such as Epic Games does with Unreal Engine.
In all instances, it is copyright law which enforces these license terms. So if you like the fact that Linus can distribute Linux under the GPL, you must also accept that some other company will have the right to distribute their software under their license.
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#76Finally. 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
It's going to be a hell for the users and the smaller developers. Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal arrangements would be needed as each country has different laws and processes. Remember the agreements and forms we fill for different countries when we want to sell paid apps/features on App Store? I also can't wait to pay account fees for many app stores and…
> Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal arrangements would be needed as each country has different laws and processes. Remember the agreements and forms we fill for different countries when we want to sell paid apps/features on App Store? I also can't wait to pay account fees for many app stores and modify my apps to fit specific app store rules.
The ruling force platforms to allow developers to use different payment processors. It doesn't force developers to use these processors.
Digital payments predate app stores by a decade. It's mostly a solved issue.
> As for the users, people will start forgetting where they paid what.
It's just a charge on your bank account in the end. I'm not sure the where is really significant.
> I think the regulators should intervene for market fairness
You must be happy then because that's exactly what they are doing.
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#77Does it merely prevent monopoly on the payment or does Apple still have full discretion on who is allowed to make an app available to your smartphone?
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#78I'm wondering how this will eventually play out if most companies start requiring Apple/Google to allow third-party apps to use their own payment system.
The commission fee that Apple charges, 30% is partially to cover operating/marketing etc. Obviously, Apple makes a good profit off the App Store these days, even though Jobs said he'd be happy if it was break even at best.
Here's an analogy I've been thinking on about this whole thing. The iPhone (or whatever phone you want) is the equivalent of a Walmart store. If you want your product to be sold in Walmart, you have to send it to their distribution center (ie App Store) and Walmart will handle sending that product out, etc. Walmart will handle the credit card transactions, etc and pay you the negotiated rate for your product (Yes, odds are Walmart buys your product first, then sells it, but with credit lines, etc it's almost the same thing).
Does Walmart allow you to go in, put your product in the store and sit there with a square device and sell your stuff? Amazon is more analogous of physical to app in the sense that Amazon is the transaction point but may or may not actually maintain control of the product.
So what's the end game? I suspect if Apple/Google has to allow developers to collect their own fees, Apple will start charging paid apps to be in the App store.
They will continue to allow free apps to be shown, but if you want to charge for your App either one time or subscription, you'll have to pay an upfront fee to be listed.
And that charge may depend on the number of downloads.
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 Like a donation? Or are these companies evading tax laws?
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.
Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If someone else doesn't want to pay 30% to Apple, then they should have that right That right? Are you saying developers should have the right to all of Apple's stuff for free, no matter what? Is Apple not allowed to distribute their tools and libraries under a license of their choosing? Should we ignore licenses altogether? Perhaps I don't want to pay the "cost" associated with use of a GPL-licensed library in my…
This argument is nonsensical.. I should be able to use my fully-paid-for device how I see fit.
Apologies if I wasn't clear. I'm talking about the relationship between Apple and developers who are building applications using Apple's proprietary software libraries.
I completely agree that consumers should have very wide rights to the device they purchased.