“Harmful” is not what apple does with its IP; although opinions will vary wildly.
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 Must Let Dating Apps Offer Alternative Payment Methods in App Store, Dutch Regulator Says
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
well, harmful is a legal term. an action can be Legal, but if it causes harm it can still be classified as illegal.
this is why a small business doing something legal can't in most cases do the same thing when they are bigger if it causes market harm. especialy in Europe as regulators act before harm is done and not after.
article
but in the USA its vastly difrent
Seems what apple does with the App Store low financial risk to entry is anything but harmful. Legally in the US challenges have stood.
Good for them, but this is still the Netherlands so not relevant as they just said apples changes aren’t enough.
Low financial risk has close no relevance to their actions
Good for apple is correct. We will see where this goes. Seems like a money grab.
Both sides just does it for a money grab. Just as with apple trying to get away without paying Ericsson their licensing fees because they think it’s to high.
27% ?
Well... the Dutch dating apps got their wish... they can use alternative payment processors.
But that does not eliminate Apple's commission.
Do we think they will try to fight the commission fee next?
9to5mac.com
Well... the Dutch dating apps got their wish... they can use alternative payment processors.
But that does not eliminate Apple's commission.
Do we think they will try to fight the commission fee next?
Apple will charge 27% commission for app purchases made using alternative payment systems in the Netherlands - 9to5Mac
Apple today provided some additional details about how it will allow dating apps in the Netherlands to offer alternative payment...
9to5mac.com
Last edited:
Makes sense. Payment processing fees are about 2-4% so Apple reduces their fee by the number of percentage points they are saving by not being the payment processor.27% ?
Well... the Dutch dating apps got their wish... they can use alternative payment processors.
But that does not eliminate Apple's commission.
Do we think they will try to fight the commission fee next?
Apple will charge 27% commission for app purchases made using alternative payment systems in the Netherlands - 9to5Mac
Apple today provided some additional details about how it will allow dating apps in the Netherlands to offer alternative payment...
Yea that makes no sense and will be attacked by the courts.27% ?
Well... the Dutch dating apps got their wish... they can use alternative payment processors.
But that does not eliminate Apple's commission.
Do we think they will try to fight the commission fee next?
Apple will charge 27% commission for app purchases made using alternative payment systems in the Netherlands - 9to5Mac
Apple today provided some additional details about how it will allow dating apps in the Netherlands to offer alternative payment...
The only difference is our iphones of some reason counts as an extension of the app store and never leaving it
And any app on our iphones must still pay a commission of its external purchases.
But for some reason if the purchase is made in safari or on another website with the exact function they don’t take a commission. This is contradictory.
- Netflix subscription made in the app on YOUR iPhone outside the store= Commission
- Netflix subscription made on YOUR iPhone web browser for the app outside the store= no commission?
- Purchasing dating app In the App Store= commission
- Dating app purchases inside the app but outside the App Store made on YOUR iPhone = commission
- Dating app website purchased on YOUR iPhone in safari outside the App Store= no commission?
- App Store web browser to dating app website purchases outside the App Store but made on YOUR iPhone = No commission?
- And now linking in the app to their website outside the App Store made on YOUR iPhone = commission?
Last edited:
It’s not contradictory it’s how Apple have set the rules. It’s always been the case that purchases made outside of apps from the iOS App Store don’t attract a commission. Nothing has changed with this new fee structure.
How would you charge the commission? On all purchases regardless of source?
27% ?
Well... the Dutch dating apps got their wish... they can use alternative payment processors.
But that does not eliminate Apple's commission.
Do we think they will try to fight the commission fee next?
Apple will charge 27% commission for app purchases made using alternative payment systems in the Netherlands - 9to5Mac
Apple today provided some additional details about how it will allow dating apps in the Netherlands to offer alternative payment...
This is a mess and completely contradictory ?
- Purchasing digital Microsoft office from apple web store on an apple device YOU OWN= commission to apple
- Purchases made inside the office you purchased from apple ON YOUR DEVICE = no commission?
- Purchasing Microsoft office from Mac/AppStore= commission to apple
- Purchases made inside the program= commission to apple
Not including other physical/online stores not doing this for purchases made outside that we would never accept. For if we would be consistent.
- Apple website buying office= commission to apple
- Digital programs In app purchases from apple’s website= MANDATORY commission to apple
- Purchasing Netflix subscription in safari on iPhone= commission to apple
- Amazon selling Microsoft office= commission to amazon
- Microsoft office subscription bought in the program you purchased from Amazon= MANDATORY commissions to amazon
- Amazon selling iPhone= commission to amazon
- App Store purchases made on your iPhone you bought from Amazon= MANDATORY commission to amazon and apple.
- iPhone in app purchases from your phone you purchased from Amazon= MANDATORY commission to amazon
- Netflix subscription made in safari on the iPhone you bought from Amazon= MANDATORY commission to amazon
Apple Don’t like amazons commission? Apple should sell on their own store.
Don’t like apples commission?
Make your own website.
Don’t like amazon having a high commission? Buy from another platform etc etc
Exactly, let the market decide what the commission should be. If Apples commission is deemed too high then developers will stop offering IAPs and sell them via another means.
Mandate anything sold on their store are integrated with their purchasing mechanism. Mandatory audits etc etc. we have countless examples that mandate a fee on any purchase made.
It’s contradictory in the sense it’s inconsistent. Why no commission if it’s bought from their web store but only from their app?
Why a commission if you link it outside the app but not in the web browser.
Why a commission on in app purchases with another payment solution.
But not other?
Why a commission on digital goods but not physical goods? This makes no sense
But why do we accept it for iPhone/android store but nothing else?
Why do we accept iPhone App Store to extend to the whole device but no other thing? Why isn’t the iPhone counted to be included in the amazon store?
Because the entire ecosystem is Apples' and the way their business is has not been deemed illegal in the US. And Apple has provided an environment that for little risk one can make millions. Or one can not charge a purchase price or IAP. But in exchange for revenue collection of IAP you, as the dev, are sharing your revenue with Apple. As far as the rules go, they have been tweaked over the years.
It would be anti-competitive of Apple to charge a commission on purchases outside of iOS apps. That’s why they don’t do it.
Well this is true for many stores both physical and digital. Amazon owns the whole ecosystem as well. So should they be able to demand a commission from apple? Considering they made the purchase possible or is that too far?
And it’s not a question of legality but if it’s anti competitive to demand it.
What’s the difference between inside an iOS app and outside an iOS app on an iPhone?
Safari is an iOS app, chrome or different mail apps are iOS apps.
Seems to be anti competitive for apple to demand a commission outside of the AppStore?
Would Netflix get a way with it if they just made a web browser that only links to their website and allow subscriptions without giving apple a commission?
Because it seems to be literally no difference to using a downloadimg Chrome and go to Netflix as you need to now subscribe without apple taking a cut?
A commission from Apple for what? What is apple selling on their store? They are selling iphones and other apple gear and are already making a profit from those sales.
It's not anti-competitive until it is.
One uses apple ip to make a sale the other doesn't.
Safari is not an third party app.
They don't.
Sure, that appears to be a valid business model. No third party app, no commission fees.
I'm agreeing with you. Third party apps that charge IAP is where apple collects a commission.
When a developer creates an iOS app and a customer downloads an iOS app, that has happened because Apple have created and maintained the iOS App Store. That is a service that Apple provides and charges developers for by means of a commission on digital transactions purchased within an iOS app.
When a developer creates a website and a user visits that website to make a purchase, that has not happened because of Apple, so Apple does not take a cut of those transactions.
Indeed. I paid for many things outside of the app store (like subscriptions), because it is cheaper than directly from the App store.
It works fine with the Apple version of the app.
Those Dutch dating apps should just offer cheaper prices on their own website and people will automatically get it from there.
I bet those Dutch dating apps want to charge same prices even if they don’t have to pay the 30% commission. Because if they offer it 30% cheaper on their own website, people would not be getting it from the App Store.
Last edited:
Amazon operates on a wholesale model for Apple devices. Not an agency (commission) model. But plenty of physical stores operate on a commission model. Malls, for example, usually require a percentage of store revenue.
No. it's about legality. A commission isn't inherently anti-competitive.
You keep asking questions that there is no significant confusion over. Developers understand the terms. Consumers aren't confused.
When a business creates a product and a customer purchases a product provided by AT&T, that has happened because AT&T have created and maintained the AT&T Store and infrastructure. That is a service that AT&T provides and charges businesses for by means of a commission in store transactions within their store and relying on their infrastructure and IP. Without AT&T and similar providers that purchase would not have happened for apple or in their App Store
Thats for a judge to decide, or the government to make laws declaring it is
In iOS an app and web app uses the exact same IP to make a sale on iOS devices. And as far as I know, apple doesn’t own amazons IP making a sale possible on their storefront
Chrome, Firefox and opera that you can download on iOS App Store is.
They do all the time on every app in the store that wants to provide a digital goods outside the store inside the app
Well it is a third party app. It’s a website wrapped in an app that only lead you to their website
Then why ahou they use their own Or competitors IP to provide IAP? Or use apples wallet instead?
Exakt same argument can be made for any store. Because if no other store sold apple devices apple wouldn’t have customers. If ATT& or Verizon etc didn’t build up their literal infrastructure, allowed apple to sell their phones and use their network and IP.
They should absolutely be allowed to take a cut from any profit apple makes on their iPhones.
Or would you argue that not a good thing?
Malls require percentages of sales, and I can guarantee you 0% of malls require a commission on any reoccurring revenue apple or Samsung or AT&T etc makes outside the mall or revenue consumers regularly spend on said devices for iCloud or App Store games and data purchases etc even tho it’s because of them the customers even exist.
Well in the way apple does it might be.
It’s a legal question. Otherwise apple wouldn’t be in courts across the globe
Apple already makes a profit on their iPhones and apps.
Why does it matter if amazon makes a profit on their sales for them not to take a commission?
And the commission is for providing the infrastructure and store for customers to purchase their products. Without amazon they wouldn’t do that sale. Just as you argue for apps making subscriptions and in app purchases because of apple
Your conflating things. Apple and Amazon have an arrangement for Amazon to sell iphones. You and I don't know the details of the arrangement.
Correct, that's what I'm saying. I bill passed by Congress however can be subject to a case for the Supreme court.
No it doesn't. The ios app store is Apple's property. Safari is copyrighted, I guess, but Apple is using open standards, open software etc. As I said above your making blind leaps about Amazon selling iphones.
I don't understand what you are conveying. Chrome and Firefox are not selling products. They are mostly open source browsers and they are free.