Apple Retains Gibson Dunn Lawyers From Samsung Case to Combat Epic Games

[dguisinger]

I have no interest in downloading your malware-ridden binary from some unknown server. Thank you.

Then don't? See, wasn't that easy?

 

[jhfenton]

People arguing that Apple provides value by providing the platform tend to forget that the apps are what makes the platform valuable. Would you want an iPhone/iPad if it didn’t have Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Netflix, Google Maps, Waze, SnapChat, you banking apps, investment apps, smart home apps, security apps, Slack, MS Office, WeChat, Zoom, Hulu, Disney Plus, Amazon Prime Instant Video, and much more?

Imagine if literally ALL of these third party apps ceased to exist on iPhone and iPad. The platform would be worthless.

So yes, Apple needs third party developers quite badly. They should treat them better.

Do you know what the apps you list have in common? They're free or generally paid for through outside subscriptions (e.g. streaming services, Microsoft Office, etc.). How much does Apple make from those apps being on the App Store? And how is Apple treating those developers badly?

 

[mrcloaked]

It's already split.

 

[dguisinger]

Do you know what the apps you list have in common? They're free or generally paid for through outside subscriptions (e.g. streaming services, Microsoft Office, etc.). How much does Apple make from those apps being on the App Store? And how is Apple treating those developers badly?

Hmm, seeing that many of them can't even ask or tell their users how to subscribe.... and how they used to let you in-app subscribe but balked at Apple taking all their revenue for providing nothing, I'd say Apple is treating those developers badly in the opinion of those developers.

If all those Developers up and left, where is the value proposition in a $1200 iPhone?

 

[TimFL1]

The amount of people in here rambling on and on about the 30% fee are missing the point.

This is not primarily about the 30%, it‘s about Apple forcing you to use their in-app payment processing (which causes 30% fees) and prohibits you from rolling your own payment processing... UNLESS you are amazon Prime Videos, then you get to do your own payment processing AND also only pay 15% commission if Apples payment processing is used.

That‘s what their payment processing lawsuit is about, Apple gives out special treatment left and right (Prime video, Hey vs FastMail, the whole Reader app clause... it‘s actually insane how the dev agreements are riddled with holes).

 

[cmaier]

The amount of people in here rambling on and on about the 30% fee are missing the point.

This is not primarily about the 30%, it‘s about Apple forcing you to use their in-app payment processing (which causes 30% fees)

No, the 30% fee is not just for payment processing. That’s a ridiculous straw man argument. Does paypal provide you with UIKit sdks, hosting, CDN, infrastructure investments, app review (necessary so customers trust you), etc.? Nope.

 

[4jasontv]

Hating on developers.....

Where is the Steve Balmer Developers, Developers, Developers video when you need it?

The Gold Rush is over.

 

[mrcloaked]

It’s a conspiracy.

 

[dguisinger]

No, the 30% fee is not just for payment processing. That’s a ridiculous straw man argument. Does paypal provide you with UIKit sdks, hosting, CDN, infrastructure investments, app review (necessary so customers trust you), etc.? Nope.

I think I'm going to ask for a refund on the 15 iOS devices i've bought over the years, I was overcharged for the UI since apparently I'm paying each developer for it. /s

 

[78Bandit]

Why should Apple do that, split the app store? It isn't in their best interests, or the customers best interests. Sure I understand why a developer would want to get on Apples infrastructure for free, but that's not the way it works.

The iphone is a lucrative minority market, which Apple owns. Want a slice of the Apple? Then you have to play by their rules.

It very much can be in the customer's best interest. If companies like Netflix, Epic, Microsoft, Amazon digital goods, etc. were given the same freedom to use their own payment systems in the application that Uber, Airbnb, McDonalds, etc. can use it would make it less onerous to sign up for and use those services along with potentially being less expensive.

Apple has created an artificial barrier that only applies to sellers of specific goods. That's their rule, but that doesn't mean the rule is compliant with consumer protections, particularly in the EU.

 

[I7guy]

It very much can be in the customer's best interest. If companies like Netflix, Epic, Microsoft, Amazon digital goods, etc. were given the same freedom to use their own payment systems in the application that Uber, Airbnb, McDonalds, etc. can use it would make it less onerous to sign up for and use those services along with potentially being less expensive.

But it may not be in the customers best interests overall. Using a trusted payment processor is a valuable asset.

Apple has created an artificial barrier that only applies to sellers of specific goods. That's their rule, but that doesn't mean the rule is compliant with consumer protections, particularly in the EU.

Apple has updated their business model as times warrant. Do you believe the world is a static place? The EU is an entirely different story.

 

[mi7chy]

I have no interest in downloading your malware-ridden binary from some unknown server. Thank you.

You download it from direct from Epic like you would for MacOS.

 

[4jasontv]

It very much can be in the customer's best interest. If companies like Netflix, Epic, Microsoft, Amazon digital goods, etc. were given the same freedom to use their own payment systems in the application that Uber, Airbnb, McDonalds, etc. can use it would make it less onerous to sign up for and use those services along with potentially being less expensive.

Apple has created an artificial barrier that only applies to sellers of specific goods. That's their rule, but that doesn't mean the rule is compliant with consumer protections, particularly in the EU.

How is investing in creating your own payment system less expensive? It's another point of attack for hackers and then you open up the risk for companies like Netflicks, Apic, Mirosoft, and Amzon to release their apps with nefarious payment systems.

 

[kingfish78]

All the people rooting for Apple here - are any of you actually developers that sell apps or In-App Purchases?

I can’t imagine anyone that has put in the thousands of hours of work to make an app, then thinks it’s cool that Apple does virtually nothing but receives a 30% cut.

What Apple does here is rent seeking, plain and simple. They’re a leach providing nothing of value. They’re a middle man to an actual payment processor which would charge less than 3% (and Apple has likely negotiated for a much lower rate than the 3% an independent developer would pay.) Apple charges 10x while adding absolutely nothing, just because they can.

The practice is without a doubt immoral, and I expect that at least some courts in the world will find it illegal.

You're missing Epic's intent. It's not to end the 30% Tax from Apple and Google. Their intent is to replace Apple and Google as the collector of the 30% Tax. Their aim is to create their own App Store and limit competition from Apple and Google in the same way it has attacked Steam through exclusivities clauses. This does not help the consumer, and is exactly the logic behind the walled ecosystem that Apple has promoted. Imagine the nuisance to the end user when you have to buy MS Office through the Microsoft App Store, Amazon Apps and their affiliates through the Amazon Store, Games through Epic or Steam, News Apps through Gannett's App Store, etc. Every one of them will have their own guidelines for privacy and data collection. This is the future that's coming if Apple loses this case.

 

[dguisinger]

But it may not be in the customers best interests overall. Using a trusted payment processor is a valuable asset.

Apple has updated their business model as times warrant. Do you believe the world is a static place? The EU is an entirely different story.

Define trusted payment processor? Is Square or Stripe or PayPal not trusted? They run most of the Internet's transactions outside of Apple, Amazon, Walmart, and Google. It only takes a developer a few lines of code.

Oh yeah, you want to have trust and integration and not have to enter your card information? In a web browser, Stripe (and others) can accept Apple Pay directly from your phone's browser. There is no reason with cooperation of Apple, apps couldn't do the same directly.... in fact, apps that do physical goods sales already do.

 

[78Bandit]

No, the 30% fee is not just for payment processing. That’s a ridiculous straw man argument. Does paypal provide you with UIKit sdks, hosting, CDN, infrastructure investments, app review (necessary so customers trust you), etc.? Nope.

The issue you are conveniently ignoring is that Apple is only charging certain companies for UIKit, sdks, hosting, CDN, infrastructure investments, app review, etc. based solely on the type of goods being sold. Every thing you listed is just as beneficial to Uber as it is to Epic, yet Epic is the only one paying above the basic developer fee.

Apple is creating artificial barriers that only apply to particular businesses and effectively use that to subsidize the other developers. Purveyors of digital goods get assessed an additional 30% while everyone else pays nothing. It will be up to the courts and regulators to see if that is in the consumers' best interests or if costs of the services you list need to be more equitably distributed to all developers.

 

[dguisinger]

How is investing in creating your own payment system less expensive? It's another point of attack for hackers and then you open up the risk for companies like Netflicks, Apic, Mirosoft, and Amzon to release their apps with nefarious payment systems.

Its really not. Most companies don't create it from scratch unless they do billions in sales. You can use someone like Stripe, with a few lines of code or HTML, and they handle it all for you. Your credit card number never even hits my servers, it goes straight to Stripe and they give me a token representing the customer and subscription. They handle the recurring billing and let me know by a webhook everytime a customer has been billed or if their subscription has been terminated. Most developers can fully integrate complex services with them in a matter of days, and don't need to worry about payment security. It just works and is taken care of for you. And Stripe charges standard merchant rates between 3-5% for what all you folks here seem to think is magical AppStore functionality

 

[cmaier]

The issue you are conveniently ignoring is that Apple is only charging certain companies for UIKit, sdks, hosting, CDN, infrastructure investments, app review, etc. based solely on the type of goods being sold. Every thing you listed is just as beneficial to Uber as it is to Epic, yet Epic is the only one paying above the basic developer fee.

Apple is creating artificial barriers that only apply to particular businesses. It will be up to the courts and regulators to see if that is in the consumers' best interests or if costs of the services you list need to be more equitably distributed to all developers.

So what? companies selling digital goods pay 30% so that 85% of apps in the store can be free. There’s no law against differentiated pricing. Just look at the medical industry. If I sell donuts I can give them away to people for free if I feel like it, and charge you double just because. That’s not “discrimination,” it’s not a violation of any anti-trust rules, and there’s no problem with it.

 

[4jasontv]

Its really not. Most companies don't create it from scratch unless they do billions in sales. You can use someone like Stripe, with a few lines of code or HTML, and they handle it all for you. Your credit card number never even hits my servers, it goes straight to Stripe and they give me a token representing the customer and subscription. They handle the recurring billing and let me know by a webhook everytime a customer has been billed or if their subscription has been terminated. Most developers can fully integrate complex services with them in a matter of days, and don't need to worry about payment security. It just works and is taken care of for you. And Stripe charges standard merchant rates between 3-5% for what all you folks here seem to think is magical AppStore functionality

If you don't like Stripe you could change it whenever you want to a different payment platform?

 

[Ethosik]

Cue “daddy Apple can do no wrong” people in 3...2...1...

Not big fan of either company btw. I will say.. that quote does put things into perspective. 😬 Wonder how Epic will respond to it..

Apple can and has done a LOT of stuff wrong. Keyboards on the laptops that lasted YEARS longer than they should. The absolutely horrible 2013 Mac Pro situation. MobileMe. Your holding it wrong. Kindle books situation.

However, you break the rules, your app gets removed.

 

[dguisinger]

So what? companies selling digital goods pay 30% so that 85% of apps in the store can be free. There’s no law against differentiated pricing. Just look at the medical industry. If I sell donuts I can give them away to people for free if I feel like it, and charge you double just because. That’s not “discrimination,” it’s not a violation of any anti-trust rules, and there’s no problem with it.

Huh, well that is a great example..... in what is becoming a publicly defined issue of Apple Greed in the public and in regulators eyes, "Don't mind Apple, they are like the beloved medical industry!"

LOL

 

[TimFL1]

No, the 30% fee is not just for payment processing. That’s a ridiculous straw man argument. Does paypal provide you with UIKit sdks, hosting, CDN, infrastructure investments, app review (necessary so customers trust you), etc.? Nope.

This is a classic denial statement that fails to look at the bigger picture. What I‘m saying is, Apple claims the same rules apply to everyone, yet Amazon and co. get free passes and can bypass these rules entirely. THAT‘s the problem. Epic wants to know WHY amazon gets a free pass even though both apps fall under the same ruleset (both sell digital goods you consume in-app).

 

[dguisinger]

If you don't like Stripe you could change it whenever you want to a different payment platform?

yes, as a developer you could swap out Stripe for PayPal or Square at anytime.

Mind you, as a developer, the hurdle would be you don't have any of your customers payment data, so if they have recurring charges, you would need to ask them to reenter their data.

Or.... what I've done on systems I've built, when you switch providers you keep the old ones going for legacy billing. If a customer updates their card details, then you switch them over to the newer payment processor.

 

[cmaier]

This is a classic denial statement that fails to look at the bigger picture. What I‘m saying is, Apple claims the same rules apply to everyone, yet Amazon and co. get free passes and can bypass these rules entirely. THAT‘s the problem. Epic wants to know WHY amazon gets a free pass even though both apps fall under the same ruleset (both sell digital goods you consume in-app).

The only example you can cite is amazon, and we all know what apple got in exchange for that - they got equal value, just not as a percentage (an all-encompassing deal including sales of apple hardware through amazon’s etail store, amazon agreeing to support certain sdks For prime video, etc.).

If i sell donuts for a dollar each, and you come in without money and instead offer me your Rolex for a dozen crullers, me accepting that offer is NOT an antitrust violation. It’s the opposite- it’s the free market at work, and it shows that apple is willing to negotiate. Epic has not alleged that it tried to negotiate, nor is there likely anything of value epic could offer that apple would be interested in.

 

[4jasontv]

yes, as a developer you could swap out Stripe for PayPal or Square at anytime.

Mind you, as a developer, the hurdle would be you don't have any of your customers payment data, so if they have recurring charges, you would need to ask them to reenter their data.

Or.... what I've done on systems I've built, when you switch providers you keep the old ones going for legacy billing. If a customer updates their card details, then you switch them over to the newer payment processor.

So what I am hearing is that you really just want to cut out Apple and pocket the difference. You don't seem to care about providing a unified experience with a single point of contact or minimizing possible security issues.