...and coming soon Apple demand 30% of any sale made on any website accessed though an Apple device as "those companies are profiteering off Apple's ecosystem"
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Discussed 'Punitive Measures' Against Netflix for Dropping In-App Purchases
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They’d think twice, realize “Hm, I watch Netflix on my TV hooked up to my stereo most of the time anyway,” and just change their habits to watch on the TV OR computer OR whatever device they have, Netflix isn’t locked to the iPad or iPhone.
BUT, if that person has an iPad because it’s super convenient, syncs with their phone and their computer and that pencil thing is the most AWESOME thing EVER… they’re not going to give that up because they can’t watch videos. They’ll likely just cancel their subscription.
If they negotiate that and actually GET it? Then more power to ‘em. However, I would suggest that any company approached by Apple with those terms to not accept that deal.
I mean, that’s what it comes down to. If you like a deal and you think it benefits you, go for it. If you don’t like a deal and you think you’re not getting what you should out of it, don’t accept it. What you DON’T want, is a system where contracts don’t have consequences.
If someone downloads the App and signs up for the service within that App. Apple has generated a sales lead and should be compensated for it.
If someone downloads an app and has an existing subscription or intends to do so offsite, there has been no lead generated by Apple thus no need for compensation, the app is simply a user convenience.
If someone downloads an App and is linked offsite to create a subscription, Apple has generated a sales lead for that service through the app and should be compensated.
If a company utilizes the ease of IAP's to facilitate an impulse purchase they otherwise might reconsider via an off-app method, Apple deserves a cut.
No it can’t. Merely discussing something like this is not against any law, and cannot have caused injury to Epic. Don’t practice law on-line without being a lawyer.
There were a few app stores for palm. In fact, I sold dopey little apps on a couple of them. There were thousands of apps available.
Can you still remember the terms for developers listing their apps for sale in those stores?
You can also look at it this way. Netflix probably think the iOS platform is a good target for them. It is to Netflix’s benefit to allow as many avenues of their contents consumption as frictionless as possible. So the iOS user base is obviously valuable to Netflix. It would be dumb of Apple not to capitalise on this.
The word ‘deserve’ are not on any businesses mind. As long as they can legally monetise their products, they will.
It’s a trap. They just need to pay 85% of the retail price of the eBook to the publisher and 30% of the retail price to Apple. I’m sure Amazon would be good with making negative income.I want to be able to buy books in the kindle app.
It’s indicative of the established business culture around these decisions. It’s also different then the revenue neutral business plan Steve Jobs originally announced.
“We don’t intend to make any money off the App Store,” Jobs said. “We’re basically giving all the money to the developers and the 30 percent that pays for running the store, that’ll be great.”
Last edited:
good comment. Also that was in an era where most apps were $.99 where IAP hadent killed most apps and where subscriptions for calculators didnt exist.
Where did I say that?
I did say telecommunications networks are regulated, not "run" by the government. Telecommunication services in the US are mainly provided by private companies - but they are regulated by governments. The FCC, for instances regulates interstate communications.
And yes, they do have a Competition Policy Division to promote competition among carriers and a Pricing Policy Division to regulate prices and tariffs (such as on intercarrier compensation), if needed.
More directly, in Europe the EU has regulated international roaming charges where they felt the market did not provide for competitive fees for end users.
in the US the government do have access anyway - as private operators are (more or less) willingly cooperating.
Yep, great example that shows how the consumer loses when the government steps in.
This is a capitalist country and you expect businesses to be kind and nice to each other? These companies are in business to make money and pay their employees who then spend their money with other companies.
If I use my windows PC on internet explorer to order something on amazon does Microsoft get a cut?
Or Safari on a mac.
You want the government to tell a private business how they run their business. That’s not regulation, that’s Nationalization. Regulation is “don’t hire anyone under 18 years old” or “please don’t use this substance we’ve determined is harmful to your health in your pre-packaged potato salad”. Nationalization is “The government will determine how much of a profit you make and will determine who you do business with, EVEN when there’s no national security risk because that other business is based in the US.” And, if the government is going to do that, they may as well just develop their own mobile platform IF your “essential products” are so essential that every person in the US should have access to it (which is highly dubious to anyone NOT living in a suburb).
You know, let’s get back to that, it’s QUITE a stretch to say ALL of those to require access from a mobile OS platform. Only ONE possibly does, COVID tracking/tracing, and that’s not “essential”, it’s a nice to have. Mobile ticket sales, Mobile banking, mobile payment? Yes, all of those of course would require a mobile phone. However, subtract “mobile” and you get banking, public transport and payments which are all handled perfectly well without a phone. Emergency alerts, personal messaging works fine via SMS and doesn’t require a smartphone. I just signed up for medical services on my laptop, but I could have done so using a telephone… a plain telephone. The vast majority of Americans never have to deal with customs declaration or visa applications, so including those are fairly questionable at best. It’s like they were added to pad the list because you thought it would have been too short otherwise
BUT even so, they can be handled in person. For the times that videoconferencing would be required for a job interview, any PC with a camera would do. Tax account administration? Ok, now you’re REAAALLY padding it! I can see how a fairly affluent class of person might see all of these as “requirements” as much as they’d consider lawn care and a full home security system “requirements”.In going over your list, know what I’ve found? Even if I wanted to force myself to do them all using a smartphone, engagement with an AppStore of any kind still isn’t required for the majority. Companies aren’t going to be getting rid of their websites any time soon because a large portion of the population still use computers for all those activities. And, they’re preferred in a lot of cases because your personal info is left on a hard drive safe at home and not on your person.
I think that, if you HAVE to start with a premise of “I WANT THESE COMPANY’S APP STORES TO BE REGULATED” and then build backwards to build a case you’ll end up with a case that doesn’t hold up well, as I’ve shown. What SHOULD be done is first build the case for why they need to be regulated and define why. The problem, though, is looking at it this way means that you end up with Google’s and Apple’s engagements with the developers of Candy Crush, Fortnite, and Angry Birds should be regulated. Because THOSE things… THOSE really DO require interaction with an App Store.
Yeah, totally. Letting someone send an email and then not following the recommendations. Terrifying to think what other things they might not do in the future and the emails that might be sent and ignored.
Firstly, In each instance they did not assist in generating the sales lead. Secondly, Apple does not a percentage to Amazon or anyone else for physical goods or services.
Yep, but they think it is.