Apple Files Appeal in Epic Games Lawsuit, Asks to Delay App Store Changes

[Hpereznoble2021]

Wishing Apple loses all this trials. After Ape started killing many small businesses that relay on Facebook to sell, I really want to see them lose their monopoly power.

Life of no one has change now that iOs14 privacy thing is up, except for dying businesses.

Inside Apple ecosystem, we are all being tracked.

I always wished the best for Apple, I’m an apple user. Now that they have hurted my business and family support, I want them to lose all this monopolic power.

why not a whole App Store of free apps that track activity? And their App Store all paid apps.

 

[hans1972]

What is Facebook paying Apple for use of it’s intellectual property?[...] Or is the argument Apple needs Facebook so Facebook is allowed to be a free rider but some indie app wouldn’t exist without Apple/iOS so they have to pay?

Facebook is probably paying Apple (close to) zero for their apps.

That's the nice thing about property. The property owner can discriminate and decide how they get paid for the use of their property. It's not up to the user of the property to decide.

Apple probably considered multiple ways to charge, but landed on something simple and enforceable. Go back to 2008 and you would see almost no complaint about the App Store with regards to the payment model.

 

[hans1972]

This injunction has nothing to do with government regulators.

The original statement was "[...] they won’t be able to charge 30% because that would render the injunction useless".

Had nothing to do with government regulations.

 

[mrochester]

What is Facebook paying Apple for use of it’s intellectual property? The app is free to download and the majority of users will never do an IAP inside the Facebook app. Or is the argument Apple needs Facebook so Facebook is allowed to be a free rider but some indie app wouldn’t exist without Apple/iOS so they have to pay?

Facebook is subsidised by the apps that do pay a commission.

 

[PC_tech]

I’m not sure you heard, but there was a recent court case. The judge decided that Apple was not a monopoly and the App Store and iOS are a single product. The App Store has never been available separately from iOS and neither of them have been sold, licensed or otherwise made available on other platforms. Being a monopoly isn’t illegal, having a monopoly on your own products is expected and getting ahead through superior products or business acumen isn’t illegal.

If anybody has anything to worry about, it’s google. Google has sold/ licensed android to 3rd party manufacturers and then mandated that they also use the Google Play store.

Stop saying the judge decided they weren't a monopoly, that's a blatant lie, she said she was making no such decision and that only Epic failed to prove it 🙄🙄🙄

 

[Manzanito]

First, I consider many developers to be bad actors and some of them have harmed me more than any other criminal in my country. I consider iOS developers a bigger threat to my well-being than any terrorist on earth.

My biggest concern is the transfer of power from Apple to developers. Many developers will use this to harm me. One example, would be sending me emails because they got my email address in the transactions in the new store.

It lessens Apple opportunity to force developers to do what's good for the user and bad for developers. Forcing app developers do not track me or making sure it's easy to cancel a subscription or forcing if you can do account creation, you also have to allow easy account deletion.

There are so many good rules Apple forces developers to follow, and we can loose all of them with multiple app stores and side loading.

Multiple stores means more complexity, having to learn to navigate new store, different kind of policies esp for complaints or getting money back. It means creating an account and entering data. Tedious. In a worst case scenario you can get upwards of hundre stores like they have on Android in China.

I can loose the ability to find all the apps in one store only.

If an extremely popular app goes side loading only, it will reduce the security of the ecosystem as a whole since so many users feel forced to do it and thus start thinking it's normal instead of something they should be afraid of.

Developers can introduce license keys if they want to.

You have to look at different stores to find the app you bought a year ago and you want to redownload it.

But it’s up to you installing a 3rd party store. I know I won’t be installing one, and most people will do the same, I suspect.

 

[hot-gril]

It needs to be explicitly stated. Like when you buy food from an app and it adds on the service charge or delivery fee. Apple should be legally required to add its fee on and show exactly how much they are charging (since the percentage sometimes varies).

When you buy food on a delivery app and it shows a fee, that's because they advertised the price as like $5 but actually you have to pay $20 after all the fees they don't disclose until the end. Which is actually BS. It's not cause they want to be super informative about how they calculate their prices. In fact there's a lot more going into that pricing than you see.

 

[PC_tech]

I will never use a payment system outside of Apple. Apple puts enormous resources to making a safe, convenient, and secure payment system.

So do the other major credit processing companies, you know, like Amex, Visa, MasterCard, they've only been around decades before Apple decided to jump in 🙄 You people really need to stop acting like Apple is the only real option, they aren't 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

 

[hot-gril]

If I get screwed over by an app, I can request a refund from Apple (and I have). If I get screwed over by an app for a purchase I made outside the App Store, I wouldn’t be able to request a refund. This sucks for me as a user, and Apple because a lot of media will be blaming Apple for letting this happen on their phones. They need to figure a way to make this possible without anyone getting screwed.

Easy, reduce the IAP fee so everyone uses that.

No, it really is about Apple making money off their platform, and that should be fine, but the govt is deciding to get involved for no good reason. Apple is absolutely in the right to fight every outcome of this ruling. I'm just not too sympathetic towards them given how much they lobby local govts to obtain unfair tax breaks.

 

[PC_tech]

I've said this before, but I'll state it again. Why does this matter? Business A is not in business to make business B exist. If it works out that way, great. But, it's not just because they're aren't a lot or many doesn't mean it's unfair. Other companies "can" create a mobile phone, OS, and app store if they so choose. Neither Google nor Apple is blocking them from doing so.


This requires Apple to build something for this to work. Something that doesn't currently exist. They would have to support its functionality across OS upgrades, and secure it whether you "customer" wanted it or not. This isn't a choice. As a customer the functionality is there even if I don't want it. The judge already ruled that Apple is not a monopoly. Just because they are successful doesn't make them a monopoly. But they are being treated as if they are a monopoly in this space anyway due to their success.

Also, customers are free to choose to NOT purchase an iOS device.


I think they solved this whole issue by having a walled garden of approved App Store apps.

STOP SAYING THE JUDGE RULED AT THEM NOT BEING A MONOPOLY, she said NOT SAY THAT 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

 

[I7guy]

So do the other major credit processing companies, you know, like Amex, Visa, MasterCard, they've only been around decades before Apple decided to jump in 🙄 You people really need to stop acting like Apple is the only real option, they aren't 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

Amex, visa master card are banks. They loan you money. You people really need get your stories straight.

 

[hot-gril]

So do the other major credit processing companies, you know, like Amex, Visa, MasterCard, they've only been around decades before Apple decided to jump in 🙄 You people really need to stop acting like Apple is the only real option, they aren't 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

Yeah, they're all insecure. It's silly that you give out your private key (the CC number) for any kind of payment, and they're even allowed to charge it in the future. Plus tons of personal details, which are another kind of private key, for partially guarding against that kind of fraud.

 

[PC_tech]

You’re entirely missing the point. You have to provide billing details to every app developer…in my case that would be 50+ that would have my personal AND billing details. The vast majority of those 50+ developers would be highly unlikely to have their security aspects setup 100%. If my CC details become compromised on just one of those, my card would be cancelled and then I would need to change the details on 50+ websites.

With Apple, there is a much smaller attack surface area….1 vs 50. It is in their corporate interest to ensure that those billing details are kept secure. If there is a fraudulent purchase, I only have to change my CC info on the one store. I have a list of all my subscriptions and purchases in a single place and a single point of contact if something goes wrong….and with a company who prides itself on customer service.

I know which option I would choose 100% of the time.

I didn't miss anything, people keep making stupid arguments 🙄🙄🙄🙄

 

[I7guy]

STOP SAYING THE JUDGE RULED AT THEM NOT BEING A MONOPOLY, she said NOT SAY THAT 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

Judge didn’t find for epic. So while the judge may have not said apple isn’t a monopoly there was no finding.

 

[hot-gril]

First, I consider many developers to be bad actors and some of them have harmed me more than any other criminal in my country. I consider iOS developers a bigger threat to my well-being than any terrorist on earth.

Dude, what apps are you even downloading? Did you go bust on RobinHood or something?

 

[mikethemartian]

You can't have a monopoly of your own product. This was proven when someone wanted to make a business out of OS X devices (Pystar) and the was also decided in the case here. A monopoly of your own product is pretty much 100% guaranteed and expected. Your goal as someone wanting to create a company is to create something unique. If you really want to make your argument THAT NARROW, then everything can be considered a monopoly. Microsoft and Sony have monopolies on what games are allowed on PS5/Xbox. I cannot fire up Visual Studio, write a game, put it on my website and direct PS5 and XBox users to download it. It needs approval and licensing fees from Sony/Microsoft. Therefore, they own the Game Distribution in their respective consoles. Regardless if I can sell it at Target or not because I still need to go through Sony/Microsoft no matter what I do.

Its so ridiculous to have people constantly call Apple as being a monopoly, yet my friend has an Android phone, can get the same critical apps and have NOTHING to do
Why don't you people put at least 10% of the effort here that you want to bring down the big bad Apple and go after the true monopolies here - ISP. I only have one choice Spectrum. And it is HORRIBLE. Why not go after them huh? Gigabit internet and its just a joke, rarely works, constantly needs to be restarted or the cables outside repaired or dealing with their own messed up issues on THEIR side.

There's a difference. The app store model is basically the same for 13 years. And when devs signed on, the TOS hasn't materially changed with regard to how things work. (Sure some things have changed with the times.) However, no one country stopped Apple when it opened their respective app stores saying this way of business goes against our laws. Therein lies the difference.

Laws change in countries all the time.

 

[PC_tech]

What changes do you feel will make the OS worse?

I wouldn't bother asking, you'll never get a straight answer

 

[I7guy]

Laws change in countries all the time.

Thanks for reinforcing my point.

 

[hans1972]

I want companies regulated - and being made to change particular policies - if and when there is a lack of competition that they're exploiting.

Then we disagree. I don't want companies to be told what do to, unless it's has to do with safety (in a broad sense) as long as they don't have massive market share.

And I certainly don't want regulations which make it worse for me even if that means giving a company with monopoly power huge amounts of profit.

 

[PC_tech]

First, I consider many developers to be bad actors and some of them have harmed me more than any other criminal in my country. I consider iOS developers a bigger threat to my well-being than any terrorist on earth.

My biggest concern is the transfer of power from Apple to developers. Many developers will use this to harm me. One example, would be sending me emails because they got my email address in the transactions in the new store.

This has got to be the most insane, out of the world argument I've seen yet, I just can't anymore with some of you. Developers are worse than actual terrorist...... Wow, just..... Wow 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

 

[vipergts2207]

Amex, visa master card are banks. They loan you money. You people really need get your stories straight.

Visa and Mastercard are not banks, nor do they lend money.

“Visa does not issue cards, extend credit or set rates and fees for consumers”

Visa Inc. - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

“Throughout the world, its principal business is to process payments between the banks of merchants and the card-issuing banks or credit unions of the purchasers who use the "Mastercard" brand debit, credit and prepaid cards to make purchases.”

Mastercard - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[hans1972]

An app update, yes. But what about IAP? If there’s some creative/drawing app that’s free with a limited set of drawing tools but allows you to upgrade in-app if you want a more complete set of tools why does Apple deserve a piece of that transaction? Presumably the free app is using the same IP as a more feature rich app would. It’s Apple who decided the best App Store model for them is free + taking a cut of IAP. It’s pretty clear the majority of App Store revenue comes from IAP micro transactions. I think a better model would be every app costs something or the cost of providing the App Store, iOS, dev tools/support, a billion people with an iPhone etc. would be calculated differently than via IAP. That way every app on the store would be contributing instead of a very small number of apps subsidizing every other app in the store.

What you are describing has certain elements from communism, and is certainly socialism. Everyone should contribute their fair share.

What you describe is a far cry from capitalism and property owners having control of their property.

 

[vipergts2207]

Judge didn’t find for epic. So while the judge may have not said apple isn’t a monopoly there was no finding.

Oddly enough, that’s exactly what a lot of people here keep erroneously saying, that Apple was said to not be a monopoly in the affirmative.

Epic ruling invites future efforts to paint Apple as monopolist -experts

A U.S. judge stopped short of labeling Apple Inc an "illegal monopolist" on Friday, but the closely-watched ruling provides a roadmap for similar claims against the iPhone maker in the future, legal experts said.

www.reuters.com

 

[hans1972]

If you go into a shop and buy a newspaper and in that newspaper you see an advert for a product. So then you buy the product. Do you then go back to the shop and pay the shopkeeper 30% of the price for being a part of that sales chain? Do you also pay 30% to the newspaper printer? And 30% to the service station that provided the fuel that helped you travel to that shop?

If Apple deserves a slice of my Netflix subscription because I sign up on iPhone why not also if I sign up on a MacBook Pro?

It hasn't anything to do with what Apple deserves but what they want and are able to enforce.

Android manufacturers get paid from Google if they install Google services on their phones, and you use those services to buy something from a company advertising on Google. Do Samsung deserves a cut because you used Google services on their device to buy something from a completely different company?

Who cares if Samsung or Google deserves it.

 

[hans1972]

Let's not pretend that there's a many relevant alternatives, shall we?

One is enough when so many would argue the alternative is superior to iOS in almost every way.

1) Has more market share in almost every country
2) Cheaper
3) More bang for the buck
4) More functionality out of the box and allowed by apps
5) Allows multiple app stores and side loading
6) Extremely more choice in hardware
7) More apps

Is there anything someone using Android couldn't have which would be possible on iOS?