The attempted extraction of my book purchases from my iPhone says otherwise!
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 Seeks to Pause 'Extraordinary' App Store Ruling in Epic Games Battle
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm officially done buying apple products. This company embodies everything I hate about corporate America.
RIP Steve.
RIP Steve.
If you have a store in a shopping mall
Then you pay rent on that space and it’s a fixed amount
The shopping mall then doesn’t go to adidas and then say you have sold 10,000 items this month we want our cut of every sale made 👍🏻
That is why the judge is currently saying zero commission because she is treating it like a shopping mall
That’s literally what happens!
It’s called “percentage rent.” The rent stores pay the mall changes monthly or quarterly based on the store’s sales. This is done because the mall owners are attracting customers to a desirable location, and get compensated for that. Kind of like how Apple attracts customers to a desirable location.
Based on what I can find online, the Mall of America charges 18%.
Is it more like that, because I'd bet the majority of developers in the App Store are very small shops who struggle to just stay alive and cover their costs. An extra 25-27% in their pockets would allow them to breathe a little.
The store vs mall question is missing one important thing -- hypothetically, in all the world there are only two shopping malls (Apple and Google) and the other one isn't accessible unless you relocate where you live. In the real world, there are dozens of malls right where you live and where stores can make the best deal OR they can build their own little shop on a corner somewhere to sell their wares. Since that cannot ever happen with Apple, the analogy isn't a good one.
oh well that must be a USA thing then
Because in my country it’s a fixed amount
It doesn’t fundamentally matter because the JUDGE is treating Apple as a host of the apps
So unless Apple changes how they charge app developers then she is very unlikely going to change that decision
Last edited:
Ok
But the iOS App Store is available everywhere 👍🏻
So because there are only 2 options compared with the real world
Then the JUDGE is within her right to put payment links into individual apps and treat them like companies that Apple are just housing
Will it though?
You’ll notice that in the EU Apple didn’t put the CTF in place for all devs, only devs who might want to distribute apps in a third party store (even if they never do).
Apple knows that the CTF disincentivizes native development, and Apple also knows that the iPhone wouldn’t sell as well if it lost all its third party apps.
Will the CTF end all third party App development?
Probably not, but the CTF might end things like the Amazon app, McDonalds app and other apps that don’t actually need to be apps.
I would hope that judges are able to get Apple to implement the CTF as a universal fee that applies to all devs equally (with the only exceptions for truly free (no monetization at all) and not-for-profit apps).
Agree. And that’s why I think the judge’s decision is unconstitutional per the taking clause. If Apple is hosting the apps on their property, then they’re entitled to a cut, even if I really wish they didn’t want one (and believe it or not, but I really do wish they didn’t want one, and would just drop the case altogether).
But I’m just a random internet commenter who took a constitutional law class in undergrad, but decided being a lawyer wasn’t for me. So my opinion doesn’t matter one iota
. We’ll see what the appeals court says.
The law isn’t black and white. If it were we wouldn’t need the courtroom.
Depends on the location -- not all landlords in the US do that. I believe more common in urban areas and malls and for some types of business versus others. I believe usually negotiable on a case-by-case basis and often seen as a tool for the tenet to avoid committing to a high fixed-cost lease when their sales are uneven or need time to ramp up.
The difference between this Mall of America versus app store comparison is that 1) there are more than 2 companies that offer malls; 2) you can build your own storefront for less than a billion dollars; and 3) your customers don't have to buy a new car to visit you at other locations that is then incompatible with the Mall of America's parking lot.
The idea that if you don't like Apple's rules you can just leave is about as reasonable as if you don't like the US legal system you can just leave the US. The number of people who change phone OS each year is about the same as the number of people who change countries.
LOL then apple seems to have it backwards lol they let Amazon and Spotify and Netflix rent free but NOT other developers lol - but they testing everything inch they can take...
In the U.S., malls typically charge retailers a base rent, often calculated per square foot, and may also include a percentage rent clause in the lease. Percentage rent is essentially a commission on sales, where retailers pay a percentage (usually 2-6%) of their gross sales above a certain threshold, known as the "breakpoint." This is common for larger retailers or anchor stores but not universal for all tenants. Smaller stores might only pay base rent plus common area maintenance (CAM) fees, utilities, and marketing fees.
For example, a lease might include base rent of $5,000/month plus 5% of sales exceeding $500,000 annually. The specifics depend on the mall, the retailer’s bargaining power, and the lease agreement. High-traffic malls or those with premium brands are more likely to include percentage rent.
“extract massive junk fees at the expense of consumers and developers."
So does that mean we can now expect lower prices from now on then Tim Sweeney?
So does that mean we can now expect lower prices from now on then Tim Sweeney?
Apple is not only guilty, they are wrong.
If your product is so good, Apple, then it should be able to compete on its own terms.
If your product is so good, Apple, then it should be able to compete on its own terms.
Having now read Apple's lawyers' filing, with the large and important caveat that I am not a lawyer, and obviously the document is an argument designed to convince people that Apple is correct, it does seem as if the judge made a couple of important errors.
Most importantly, I did not realize that a California court ruled, and a California Appeals court upheld, that the exact same anti-steering provision that the Judge Rogers found violated California law did not violate California law. And Judge Rogers just ignored that fact and said it did. That seems to be a pretty big issue, since I would assume California courts, not federal ones, would be the authority on what does or does not violate California law.
Most importantly, I did not realize that a California court ruled, and a California Appeals court upheld, that the exact same anti-steering provision that the Judge Rogers found violated California law did not violate California law. And Judge Rogers just ignored that fact and said it did. That seems to be a pretty big issue, since I would assume California courts, not federal ones, would be the authority on what does or does not violate California law.
Exactly! Proponents of Apple here love to use the "store analogy", so allow other app stores or direct downloads from developers direct and if Apple's App Store is so great and so much where everyone wants to get their apps, they shouldn't have a problem! For everyone else, we either pay lower prices or the developers get to keep more of their income.
The number of people who change countries as things stand today is more than. The number of people who change phone o/s.
That's interesting though I believe too late -- Apple already tried to appeal that ruling back in 2021 and lost. Generally findings of fact aren't appealable and now the issue isn't whether the original ruling was correct but rather whether Apple complied with it. Apple is being penalized for not complying. Just like you can go to jail for not paying your taxes even if you thought the tax imposed was not fair.
1) There are more than two companies that offer App Stores. 2) Yes, but if you want the benefits of selling to the customers at the Mall of America you have to deal with the rules at the Mall of America. 3) Web apps exist, free apps with off-site subscriptions exist. There are plenty of ways to reach Apple's customers.
Developers don't have a "right" to access to Apple's customers any more than I have a "right" to access the Mall of America's customers. If I want access to those customers, then I need to abide by the rules.
As someone who has lived in another country, the idea that it's harder to switch OSes than to move to another country is absolutely ridiculous. Next time you need a new phone, buy one from another manufacturer. Done.
It's also not like Apple hasn't been abundantly clear about being a closed ecosystem the entire time the iPhone has existed.