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

[I7guy]

Do you understand what a mature market is and how that relates to the iPhone in the early days versus a decade and a half later? If you do, then you understand that absent some colossal screw up like pulling the App Store, would-be challengers trying to compete with Apple and Google are all but certain to fail. The near impossibility is why nobody is trying. Amazon, MS, Samsung, and Facebook would be in a better position than anybody out there to try, but they aren’t because they understand how this market works. It would be money and resources thrown straight into the garbage.

Do you understand there may be more than one way to skin a cat? You already have Apple capitulating, and while that may be exactly what they do, there are options they can take to protect their interests. They may settle for a few billions less here and there in order to preserve what they believe is an overall better system.

 

[hans1972]

Download it on my computer? And install the app? Or use their App Store? How is this even a question? We already have apps not available on apples App Store but on other stores, such as Cydia, you just can use it because Apple say so…

Well then you need to allow competition on the price if not with the store. And why can’t I jailbreak my phone because I want to? And install difrent apps from it that aren’t allowed on the store or simply to restricted to be usable.

Installing and app from my computer is more inconvenient which I don't want. It's the main reason I'm defending the status quo. I would rather pay more to have convenience and conformity.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

You make it sound like the iphone was useless without a third party app? History would beg to differ.

Without third party apps the iPhone would have failed spectacularly.

Doesn't mean they are bad either. All that matters is if the law is broken.

It means by definition it’s catastrophic. They can abuse you as they wish and just have some good parts. Competition is always healthy and works like a check.

Which they haven't. Past or present law. Some countries are trying to create new laws that will then force Apple and Google to comply with. Again, "new" law of which isn't in affect to stop the current stores from working as they have been.

They have been found breaking multiple laws in EU m, Korea, Japan etc. and have been found guilty. Nations are now just implementing even stricter laws as the once today aren’t strict enough.
min the USA they haven’t broken any laws yet.

No shots fired in North Korea for many decades now. No new wars over their rules. Whether they are right in "their laws" or not. They still exist as a country.

Indeed and they have no option but to comply

And yes, you accept the terms. If you choose to not accept the terms, you don't get to use iOS or Android. You don't get to shop on the play or app stores either. You accept the terms or you don't.

I haven’t accepted any terms when I purchased my iPhone, my MacBook, Apple Watch, LG tv or other gadgets? Unless a contract is signed before I purchase something it’s legally irrelevant. I never pressed any agreement to use the App Store ether. If they want anything to be legally relevant they must give me a contract in store to sign before accepting my purchase.

Developers didn't have a place to develop before the App or Play stores? I just went to a BestBuy yesterday. Seems like there are plenty of "apps" or "games" and or gift cards I could buy from a range of developers. Nothing to stop me from paying BestBuy my money for those items. While giving even less of a cut to those developers. Internet Explorer is only recently being depreciated. It took some time to get it somewhat disconnected from the operating system (explorer for files internet explorer for internet). I still don't get Chrome or Firefox installed by default on any installation of Windows. It's not an option to have it, I have to go get it using either Internet Explorer and or Edge.

As far as I know, Best Buy doesn’t stop you from selling anywhere else with a different price.
if you lived in EU you would notice with every windows installation since 2010 have had internet explorer removed from the OS and allowed you to chose another browser without even touching IE

this is at best a guess. You have no idea if that will or will not happen. It's just as likely to have no meaningful impact one way or another.

If it have no meaningful impact then the store should outcompeted with other options and allow apple to continue to refuse to improve it. Win win ether way

The tax is not a tax, it goes to running the store and profits for doing so.

Apple haven’t proved this to justify their 30% cut. It’s close to pure profits. Developers pay a developers fee to use the store.

Tax is collected for any local governments of course, which is also part of the "cut" that Apple provides.

Do you honestly believe that? Can you prove it as well? Considering some places have 25% VAT included in the price shown. This is never asked afterwards as they do in the USA.

Developers don't have to worry about what place in the world their app sold in and what they "owe" in real taxes to said locations. If they have got a problem with that, they can make their own device, OS and sell it directly.

Or just allow them to use a different payments system for IAP.

Who wouldn't want an EPIC phone that played all the games they distribute AND had the added benefit of being a phone? They could create their own AppStore and sell all the apps developers wanted to sell through them, and charge them a cut of the sales... Oh wait....

I’m sorry but I’m the owner of my phone. Not apple. Love using the Altstore on iPhone or cydia. And currently apple tries to force me to use only their store

Depends. I don't feel as if I'm in an abusive relationship.

Said no domestic victim ever.

Lower prices are always good for the consumer. For the developer? Don't they control the majority of the price?

No, they are forced to pay apple 30% of their price and stopped from having a lower price online to compete with apples apps tire price

There are a ton of apps on both stores that are free. How much cheaper you want it to be? Developers have options. They can write for whatever platform they want. They can even make a new platform if they want.

I want developers haviing the ability to use Apple Pay next to IAP buth with up to 30% lower price or just to keep everything instead of apple. Apple should just increase the developer access price instead

If the majority of it's members want change. One person in a union is just as useful as one person not in a union. We don't know what the majority of developers want out of the App or Play stores. The majority could be fine with it as is. And you have EPIC, Spotify and some others that want the stores to be darn near free for them to exist on. Or the ability to bypass the stores that made them popular in the first place.

I can bet a million dollars 99% of developers would not be against the ability to have other payment options available to them to use instead of IAP only. Epic and Spotify doesn’t want it to be free. They want the ability to use their own payment system or ability to send

From start to finish the physical and digital stores work the same. There is supply of a product. Those whom own that supply sell it to a distributer, which puts it in a store for consumers to buy. The owners of the supply "could" also sell direct, a la a farmers market or EPIC games store. They can charge closer to what it costs them vs the add-on or markup costs being added to it. However, they still pay for the location they sell the product (farmers market) or digital online store. Unless you go to the farm or EPIC to buy direct. They still have to setup something in order for you to purchase from them. They have to handle everything that goes behind the sale (Taxes, rental space, or land taxes, server farm/cloud etc.).

Except you missed the small little detail. When I buy a pc with windows 11 at Walmart, I only pay Walmart once. Why would I be forced to pay Walmart again for any extra purchases?

That is if they are even allowed to do so based on the terms and conditions they may have signed and agreed to if they sell to a distributer. Maybe they can't sell within 100 miles of the nearest store that carries the same stuff? Whatever the rules work out to be.

Well I’m glad that such contracts are illegal here. A contract forbidding me to sell within X distance is anticom

Not everyone can do this, and not everyone wants to. App stores operate the same as any physical store. Which is why changes will be at best small. If you make a digital store operate differently than a physical store. You will change how physical stores work as well.

Online stores already work differently. Let’s make online store work the same by forbidding companies from double dipping.
tske a cut from the selling of the product but outlaw taking a cut from purchases made inside the program

Someone will state that they want to sell their goods at a Target or BestBuy direct to consumer. Even-though they can via the web they already operate a store front out of. They will say it will save the consumer money and be better for everyone. Why can't I see my Fortnite game for 10% less in that Target or BestBuy store and pay that store nothing? Why can't I have a register that only my stuff gets sold from? If you let it go that way for a digital store, nothing stopping it from working it's way down to the physical.

False equivalence as these things your saying have nothing to do with this movement. Nobody is arguing that apple can’t take a cut from a purchase ON the App Store. Nobody is arguing that apple can’t take a fee for be out ON the store

what everyone is arguing is apple should not be allowed to force every in app purchase to pay a cut to apple.

And who wants to do that? Is it not easier for the consumer to contact Apple or Google for help in this issue? As a customer I don't care who made the app or where they are located. I just want my issue resolved as soon as possible. Not fight in court.

Could still be the same, apple could put in their contract that any refund they do will be an invoice to the developer etc. let’s give us the option as apple isn’t our parents. We have a million ways to solve that when it comes.

 

[PC_tech]

They are looking at it. For one they are not technologically savvy folks. They think you can put backdoors into the phone only for the good guys to use. They don't like Encryption, cause they have to work at breaking into it when they hunt for evidence on your device.

They think the digital store is somehow vastly different from a physical one. In the end, they will most likely only curb the digital stores around the edges. You will be able to inform the consumer to purchase something outside the store. Apple will put a nice face on it so you don't actually leave the store (per-say). You enter your PII and Apple will take a 28% cut of the sale anyway. Why, cause the only thing they didn't do for the developer is charge the processing fee. Everything else still was on and in the Appstore. They will standardize the format for how that information is presented (think fine print).

Then another developer will complain it's not enough. And we will circle jerk this all over again. But, this time, Apple will say we did what was required.

Yawn.....

 

[vipergts2207]

The possibility of pulling out of S. Korea is a great possibility, imo.

Feel free to @ me when Apple pulls out of SK.

Doesn't matter if you want to discuss it or not. It's an option.

Like I said, so is giving us $1 million.

According to who?

So you believe pulling the App Store out of SK does less damage than simply allowing third-party IAP? Interesting theory.

Then google will be under the regulatory gun.

And the iPhone will be the next Blackberry.

With all due respect, as you are not in the trenches with Apple dealing with this, you cannot know what they have put on the table as possible options.

With all do respect, you don’t have to be “in the trenches” with Apple to know that, when in conflict, government law trumps business preferences.

 

[BootsWalking]

Not exactly. Anyone can download Xcode for free. Anyone can write an app is Objective-C or Swift in Xcode for free. Anyone can deploy that app onto their own iOS device that they have under their control for free.

The membership fee is for the App Store support - deployment profiles, team configurations and portal, and store certificates.

Thanks, you're right. I think that proves my point even more - Apple collects a fee for developers to be able to distribute their app, so they're double-dipping by requiring developers to distribute their non-free apps in their App Store and collecting a fee there as well rather than letting them distribute apps without Apple's distribution infrastructure.

 

[I7guy]

Feel free to @ me when Apple pulls out of SK.

Feel free to @ me if apple capitulates. I'll be the first to say I am not privvy to Apples internal thinking.

Like I said, so is giving us $1 million.

Sure but one option is viable.

So you believe pulling the App Store out of SK does less damage than simple allowing third-party IAP? Interesting theory.

Or disallowing IAP in SK completely.

And the iPhone will be the next Blackberry.

If that is your considered opinion.

With all do respect, you don’t have to be “in the trenches” with Apple to know that, when in conflict, government law trumps business preferences.

With all due respect, if apple stops IAP in SK can government force apple to institute it?

 

[vipergts2207]

Eliminating IAP in S Korea would actually be the easiest and most genius way of making a point. Change the developer agreement to something along the lines of “All in app/ game content should be present in the app and the app is not allowed to have any purchasable options using currency not earned in-game”.

It will force developers in S Korea to up their prices to how it used to be in the “olden days” and have no way of extending the game without releasing a second game or “extension pack” within the App Store.

$40 for an App/ game and if you want extra levels or content, buy an “extension pack” from the store (not in app) for a further $10.

It will completely destroy the IAP business model in S Korea but keeps all purchases on the App Store and all commissions easily collectable. It will set a pretty clear example to developers worldwide as to the unintended consequences of regulation. Google will for sure follow Apple’s lead.

In S Korea, a pretty small market, I can’t see it bothering Apple at all. A law can’t force a business to provide a service that it doesn’t want to. It can only stop a business from providing a service that it does.

If you think I’m against that outcome, then let me tell you I’m not. No more nickel and dimming consumers with micro-transactions. It’s a terrible business model for consumers that the Apple’s status quo helped perpetuate.

 

[I7guy]

Thanks, you're right. I think that proves my point even more - Apple collects a fee for developers to be able to distribute their app, so they're double-dipping by requiring developers to distribute their non-free apps in their App Store and collecting a fee there as well rather than letting them distribute apps without Apple's distribution infrastructure.

What double-dipping again? I really want to hear how Apple is double dipping. Is like like the DMV forcing you to get a license and registration?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

What about when there was no sale, but the app was put up by the author for free? In this case, would Apple have a right to the "eventual" transaction?

Nope, if apple have a problem with this they should increase the cost of putting apps on the store or a percentage of all revenue (including advertisement on the all)
Or have the IAP service available and give a good reason for developers to use it instead other cheaper options.

This is typical. Stores do not want to carry products if the upgrades aren't also available through them. Often if someone wants to include say a pamphlet in their manual to go buy additional stuff directly, they need it approved or risk having physical product returned at a cost.

As long as I can purchase these things without involving the store and providing information where to find it.

When you see a vendor like AT&T or Comcast inside a store like Walmart or Best Buy selling service, it is by giving the store a cut. It is called customer acquisition and is big money.

That’s I okey. Walmarts cut stoops at their doors tho and can’t claim any cut a customer does afterwards as it should be. Apple get a cut for providing a customer. And they shouldn’t have a right for any more money than that from further purchases done inside the app.

You said it. You don't own a physical product, you are buying into into an ongoing service. It's the difference between buying a car and renting one.

Nope, I buy a product and still own it. Never did I start renting anything from apple.

Apple absolutely does NOT engage in most-favored nation clauses anymore. This stopped right around the iBooks/Amazon antitrust action. Apps are free to allow for cheaper purchasing directly. Under certain conditions, they may skip in-app purchasing as an option altogether (aka reader apps).

Well I’m glad apple hopefully won’t be allowed to discriminate and must treat every app as a reader app.

That said, anti-steering is Apple saying you can't advertise to customers how to buy direct - if you aren't using the App Store for customer acquisition, then you already have and maintain a relationship with them. The actual outcome of the Apple v Epic trial is that Apple has an injunction against such anti-steering rules.

Anti steering clauses are being outlawed as we can see now. Thankfully

Anti-steering is why Amazon Kindle and Netflix just dump you to a login screen without a way to sign up and without in-app purchases (in the case of kindle). They can't, without giving Apple a cut.

Well it’s coming to an end now

Note that Apple tries very hard not to have a special case for a company, although they sometimes only market a program or document an entitlement to a specialized audience - sometimes you have to join a program to get access. An example is the Video Partner Program https://developer.apple.com/programs/video-partner/

Apple should have just not been anti competitive in the first place and just allowed developers to advertise them to subscribe somewhere else. Apple have no value at all to warrant their cut.

 

[I7guy]

If you think I’m against that outcome, then let me tell you I’m not. No more nickel and dimming consumers with micro-transactions. It’s a terrible business model for consumers that the Apple’s status quo helped perpetuate.

It's more like pay as you go. Sure devs could charge a hefty upfront fee and then make all of the goodies available to the app. But I believe sales will tank. This allows people to pay as they go.

 

[hans1972]

It went perfectly just because of apple. EU have forced Ireland to close its loop hole by simply making every point of sail the ones who gets the taxes instead of Ireland and an agreed minimum tax rate of 15%. So we got great legislation from this misuse of tax law.

Apple dealt with the Irish tax problem in 2015 by relocating one of their subsidiaries from "nowhere" to Ireland and then to Jersey. Then they sold their IP from "Apple Jersey" to "Apple Ireland" for a huge amount causing "Apple Ireland" to have a great loss in 2015/16. That loss was so great, it can be used to reduce taxes from profits for the the next 15 years, so until about 2030. So Apple will be paying close to zero in tax in Ireland until the end of this decade at least.

The EU digital levy has seen little progress. Earlier this year Ireland, Hungary and Estonia joined a group of tax havens opposing the work being done in OECD for taxing companies where they also sell their wares and services. Since such a levy would require agreement from all member states those three EU countries would have to be convinced to support it.

After intense US pressure the EU commission pressed the pause button the EU digital levy this summer. Every euro paid in taxes to EU-countries would mean one euro less paid in US taxes at some date. So the US are about to loose a lot of tax money if EU succeeds with taxing American tech companies.

The latest news seems to be that a proposal is coming this month and the levy is planned to be about 0.3% for sales online.

I'm not sure this will affect Apple much, which will probably just make the developer get less money to offset some of the increased taxes, which they have done when countries like France and Britain have introduced similar measures. Or they might even increase the price for customers.

 

[Michael Scrip]

It's more like pay as you go. Sure devs could charge a hefty upfront fee and then make all of the goodies available to the app. But I believe sales will tank. This allows people to pay as they go.

Exactly.

As much as I hate microtransactions... I don't think people want mobile games to be $20 or $50

And developers won't want that either... since they make tons more money on in-game upgrades and bonuses.

Yeah it sucks that many games today are funded by microtransactions... but it'll be difficult to unring that bell.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[vipergts2207]

Feel free to @ me if apple capitulates. I'll be the first to say I am not privvy to Apples internal thinking.

Sure but one option is viable.

Or disallowing IAP in SK completely.

If that is your considered opinion.

With all due respect, if apple stops IAP in SK can government force apple to institute it?

Apple not allowing third-party IAP just because they decide to stop offering their own, may very well not comply with the new South Korean law as well. Though assuming it’s legal, Apple would be screwing themselves to do that. And that’s fine lol.

 

[I7guy]

Apple not allowing third-party IAP just because they decide to stop offering their own, may very well not comply with the new South Korean law as well. Though assuming it’s legal, Apple would be screwing themselves to do that. And that’s fine lol.

It’s also fine with me if they screw themselves. As I said I don’t know what their internal thinking is.

 

[vipergts2207]

It's more like pay as you go. Sure devs could charge a hefty upfront fee and then make all of the goodies available to the app. But I believe sales will tank. This allows people to pay as they go.

And much like Rent A Center, paying as you go is generally a giant ripoff. Like I said, the current ‘pay little to nothing for an app’ status quo and then charging for bits and bobs over and over again in the app sucks for consumers and their wallets. People generally won’t tolerate a $200 video game, but they’ll happily spend, perhaps unaware of the mounting costs, that much in micro-transactions over weeks and months. Bring on this, ‘everything must be in the app’ realty. Please.

 

[I7guy]

And much like Rent A Center, paying as you go is generally a giant ripoff. Like I said, the current ‘pay little to nothing for an app’ status quo and then charging for bits and bobs over and over again in the app sucks for consumers and their wallets. People generally won’t tolerate a $200 video game, but they’ll happily spend, perhaps unaware of the mounting costs, that much in micro-transactions over weeks and months. Bring on this, ‘everything must be in the app’ realty. Please.

That’s the way it is. Micro transactions in most parts of the world are here to stay.

 

[vipergts2207]

That’s the way it is. Micro transactions in most parts of the world are here to stay.

And if that gets killed off as a byproduct, then good.

 

[hans1972]

IAP didn’t exist in 2008.

It was introduced in March 2009 as part of iPhone OS 3 and extended to free apps in October 2009.

IAP was seen then as a way of offering free apps to users to get them hooked and use IAP to make micro transactions. I believe almost every game developer was wild about IAP in 2009.

 

[hans1972]

So you think there’s nothing wrong with a business model where a small, indie developer has to pay a 30% commission to a $2T company but a near $1T company pays nothing even thought they both access the same App Store, same IP, same customer base?

No, not at all. Even the opposite would be OK where Facebook would pay 30% and the indie developer would pay 0%.
It should be up to each business to choose their business model in B2B.

Apple has chosen a business model were the total revenue of their developers don't matter which is fine.

Do Facebook pay more for individual hotel rooms or flights than the indie developers? No, they almost certainly pay less since they buy more of them? Is that fair? Should hotels charge based on revenue and income of their guests?

 

[djphat2000]

You do realize without all of those apps that iOS would be nothing?

I call BS on this. Again, the iPhone existed BEFORE DEVELOPERS made 1 single app.
It was $499+. They sold without any developer having written a single app for an AppStore that didn't even exist for another year. I very much doubt that iOS would be nothing.

 

[pacalis]

Except you missed the small little detail. When I buy a pc with windows 11 at Walmart, I only pay Walmart once. Why would I be forced to pay Walmart again for any extra purchases?

Here a big detail. Fortnite is free. So the more appropriate analogy is that Walmart would distribute the product for free and then the consumer would pick it up, go home and pay the producer on their payment system.

Funny how retail stores with this business model don't exist!

 

[hans1972]

You can’t force there to be more competitors in the market than the market will support. We used to have several and the market decided only two could be supported. This isn’t all that different than the desktop market, Windows and macOS. Yeah there’s Linux, but it’s quite niche. It makes sense why markets don’t support a wide range of OS’s. Popular developers aren’t going to spend the time putting their apps on six different OS’s. They’re probably going to pick the one or two most popular. A lack of important apps then kills off the less popular OS’s. At this point, all governments are left to do is regulate the ones that survive since new competition isn’t going to be coming in to disrupt the market. Windows and Mac have been the only two significant desktop platforms for decades and that’s almost certainly going to be the case in smartphones with iOS and Android as well.

In 2006 neither iOS or Android existing in the market place. The smartphone market was huge. And yet both Apple and Google succeeded.

Social media. Look at Tik Tok, even with dominant players like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Twitter, Youtube and others, Tik Tok succeed just in the last few years. Or SnapChat for that matter.

And in the desktop market, you are forgetting Chromebooks.

 

[vipergts2207]

No, not at all. Even the opposite would be OK where Facebook would pay 30% and the indie developer would pay 0%.
It should be up to each business to choose their business model in B2B.

Apple has chosen a business model were the total revenue of their developers don't matter which is fine.

Do Facebook pay more for individual hotel rooms or flights than the indie developers? No, they almost certainly pay less since they buy more of them? Is that fair? Should hotels charge based on revenue and income of their guests?

Facebook pays lower rates per room (at least in your scenario) because they’re spending more money at that hotel in total than Joe Blow renting one room. It’s a bulk discount and is extremely common for all kinds of things. That’s irrelevant to the the App Store model though. Are you Facebook or Netflix worth hundreds of billions with whole teams of devs using Apple’s tools? Ok you pay next to nothing to Apple for the tools and resources here that everybody claims are so valuable simply because of the way your app works. Are you some guy worth nothing who’s trying to start something from the ground up? Ok, you pay Apple 15% for the privilege.

 

[djphat2000]

Which is why I think the business model needs to change. Come up with some other way of charging developers and it should only be tied to the cost of running the App Store and providing the tools/support to develop and maintain an iOS app. No more of this rent seeking. No more of this you’re only successful because of Apple and therefore we deserve a cut of your success.

So you want to change how business in general work? Cause this would change how all business work. As in no profit. Just enough to keep it going and pay people. Who in their right mind would sign up for that?