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 Fined $12 Million in Russia for Violating Anti-Monopoly Rules With App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Rootin'-tootin' Putin's got some expensive home repairs to make.
Builders at 'Putin's £1bil palace' confirm it is riddled with mould
Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny last month released a series of images purportedly of the palace's luxurious rooms. Now builders have confirmed the home is riddled with mould.
Yikes. That is one bad exchange rate. I guess that’s what happens when you just keep printing money to pay for your debts…
100% this and more …
Every electronic appliance or device‘s app store along the likes of Sony TV, Vizio TV, LG TV, etc controls their app store.
Every digital book store controls 100% what is on their store.
Every retail chain has 100% control over what is sold in their retail stores.
Every retail shop has 100% control over what they sell in their shop.
…
How about wanting to buy a loaf of bread at the butcher’s and some meat for the grill at the baker’s?
Why do these small businesses in the village get control over what they sell in their shop?!
let me try
"Putin occupies a dominant position with a 100% share of the political control for laws he approves in Russia"
perhaps russian government will hire you as an advisor!
Apple and Google are both abusing the mobile space with the app discrimination and cuts they take.
I sell a movie via company x video store on iOS, please give Apple 30% of the cut because they require you to use their in app purchase mechanism.
I sell a physical copy of the movie via my app, oh please go ahead and use any payment mechanism you want, oh also in doing so you don’t need to pay Apple any cut of it.
Results in Apple effectively forcing themselves into the best position to sell digital goods, as they don’t have to give anyone 30%, but everyone else has to give them it.
Google does the same, it’s not right any longer now that smartphones are effectively a part of society to the point where without them most can’t exist.
I sell a movie via company x video store on iOS, please give Apple 30% of the cut because they require you to use their in app purchase mechanism.
I sell a physical copy of the movie via my app, oh please go ahead and use any payment mechanism you want, oh also in doing so you don’t need to pay Apple any cut of it.
Results in Apple effectively forcing themselves into the best position to sell digital goods, as they don’t have to give anyone 30%, but everyone else has to give them it.
Google does the same, it’s not right any longer now that smartphones are effectively a part of society to the point where without them most can’t exist.
When you sell a Blu-ray movie at Best Buy, Best Buy takes a 15% cut regardless if credit card, gift card, or straight up cash was used to pay for it.
I am going to guess that you never produced anything in your life or you would know a little more about how the world turns.
Reality =
Manufactured goods ( materials + labor + bit of profit ) = wholesale to > distributor + markup > retailer + markup > + taxes = consumer price.
Because it suddenly is a digital marketplace, does not mean that a manufacturer or creator can claim 100% of the consumer price, unless they sell their own goods in their own store.
Just like if you produce or manufacture something at home, you get to claim 100% of the money. When other people get involved, expect them to markup your item, charge fees, etc.
It really is a matter of perspective
> produce anything real and you get 10-25-50% of what the consumer pays retail?
> produce something digital and you get 70% of what the consumer pays?
Sounds like a sweet deal!
Last edited:
Gotta make up for that low oil revenue due to the pandemic and shift to greener alternatives.
Russia seems to be the most unsurprising government to issue a fine to Apple. It will be more interesting when EU fully kicks in.
Just like someone mentioned in another thread: if you don’t like a certain country’s regulation, leave.
And yeah…. Typical defender.
Just like someone mentioned in another thread: if you don’t like a certain country’s regulation, leave.
And yeah…. Typical defender.
Last edited:
Then Playstation Store, Xbox Store and Nintendo Eshop are their own markets. Let's just break them all wide open.
You do realize that even if you want to release a physical copy of a game on PS4, Xbox or Switch you STILL need to pay Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo right?
- Those are games consoles, not general purpose pocket computers that make phone calls as one function.
- Games consoles feature physical media, which can be bought in independent competitive retail distribution stores.
- Games consoles are generally sold at a loss by console makers in order to create a larger market for developers, than they would otherwise have if consumers had to buy the console at a profitable price for the manufacturer.
No one is forcing you to sell anything through the AppStore. If you don’t like Apples terms don’t try and sell there. It’s that simple. You have zero inherent right to sell anything on the iPhone, just like you have zero inherent right to sell your products at a WalMart.
None of those points are relevant. And they are also inaccurate.
1. So what if it’s a game console or a “general purpose computing device”? You don’t have a right to sell on either one.
2. Modern consoles are more than that anyway, you can watch videos, listen to music, some even have business apps (the Nintendo DS for example)
3. They aren’t inherently gaming devices, the home brew community has demonstrated they can be used for other things
4. Not all consoles support physical media
5. All the major console makers now and since their beginnings require fees and percentages to sell games for their platforms. They also have to approve each game (or app) for their platform.
6. Being sold at a loss is irrelevant, it just proves Apple is better at making a profitable product than they are
The ascendent view of competition regulators is that if a company creates a device which generates with it, its own market ecosystem, competitors DO in fact have a right to sell their products into that ecosystem, even in a way that directly competes with the market-owner's interests.
This is why car companies can't stop third parties selling alternative-to-manufacturer's components.
Cry all you like about what you think is "fair", and whether Apple should be able to "our way or the highway" it, BUT the trend amongst regulators world-wide is that "smartphones" isn't regarded as a "market" for competition purposes, and iOS is.
Once a company exercises enough control over a market, or enough scale, the rules governing that company change. A trillion dollar company cannot expect to do business under the same regulatory framework as a 20 million dollar company, and it's a child's attitude towards competition policy to believe otherwise.
Last edited:
Entirely wrong analogy, for starters, BK isn't open to other vendors to sell in their shop...
But that's besides the point, because you fail to grasp the difference between having a monopoly and abusing the monopolistic position---the former is not outlawed anywhere, AFAIK, the latter is frowned upon everywhere, AFAIK! Perhaps you like people telling you what you may or may not do with things you spend good money on, others might take a different view...
Burger King also doesn't require you to buy a digestive system from Burger King, that is incapable of processing McDonalds food, if you want to eat at Burger King.
"You want to eat McDonalds, you're free to go get a new digestive tract installed."
