Apple Working on Solution for EU Core Technology Fee Possibly Bankrupting Apps That Go Unexpectedly Viral

[avkills]

DOJ just launched their case against Apple today. Going to be interesting. Suffice to say it will probably boil down to Apple being forced to unwall iOS and allow side loading of apps.

I am pretty much over it. I guess if enough people are harmed via scum apps then the people will have a case against the government. I for one think that being naive isn't a valid excuse anymore. Web and tech have been around long enough for people to know what they are getting into.

Personally I would never side load any apps on my iPhone or iPad unless it was something from a major software vendor like Adobe. Just isn't worth the risk. Even more so if you have any sort of financial software/information on your device.

Who brought the popcorn? 🤣

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I'm not misunderstanding you. You're trying to move the goalposts. You originally said that Apple claimed that the developer fee was enough to cover the costs of Apple's resources. You went on the claim that 150 million per year was likely enough to break even. None of that is remotely true.

Well that’s my bad, I should have said it’s my interpretation from the public information Apple have provided.

And if apple isn’t asking for a higher price then it’s reasonable to assume whatever apple makes is enough to cover the costs.

No, it's not. The full terms of the agreement were what was required. Not just the ones you pick and choose.

So can point to somewhere in the ToS or contract that obligates you to pay anything more than 99$ to get full access?

Where do they say the commission is paying for any technology, SDK, code library etc?

Plus the meaning of the word commission is clearly defined:

commission​

a fee paid to an agent or employee for transacting a piece of business or performing a service
especially : a percentage of the money received from a total paid to the agent responsible for the business

I know you'd say that because it fits your argument, but you are wrong. Apple decides what they are charging for. You don't get to decide what they are charging for just to make your argument easier.

I agree that Apple decides what they are charging for, I’m using the common legal definition for what a commission is as Apple haven’t defined it differently. As well as what’s included. And nothing points to the fee to cover anything else if going by what’s explicitly stated in their terms.

Appointment of Agent and Commissionaire​

1.1 You hereby appoint Apple and Apple Subsidiaries (collectively “Apple”) as: (i) Your agent for the marketing and delivery of the Licensed Applications to End-Users, and (ii) Your commissionaire for the marketing and delivery of the Licensed Applications to End-Users.

1.2 In furtherance of Apple’s appointment under Section 1.1 of this Schedule 1, You hereby authorize and instruct Apple to:

1. market, solicit and obtain orders on Your behalf for Licensed Applications from end-users located in the regions identified by You in the App Store Connect tool;
2. provide hosting services to You subject to the terms of the Agreement, in order to allow for the storage of, and end-user access to, the Licensed Applications and to enable third-party hosting of such Licensed Applications solely as otherwise licensed or authorized by Apple;
3. make copies of, format, and otherwise prepare Licensed Applications for acquisition and download by end-users, including adding the Security Solution and other optimizations identified in the Agreement;
4. allow or, in the case of cross-border assignments of certain purchases, arrange for end-users to access and re-access copies of the Licensed Applications, so that end-users may acquire from You and electronically download those Licensed Applications, Licensed Application Information, and associated metadata through one or more App Stores or the Custom App Distribution Site.
5. use (i) screenshots, previews, and/or up to 30 second excerpts of the Licensed Applications; (ii) trademarks and logos
6. otherwise use Licensed Applications, Licensed Application Information and associated metadata as may be reasonably necessary in the marketing and delivery of the Licensed Applications
7. facilitate distribution of pre-release versions of Your Licensed Applications

1.3 The parties acknowledge and agree that their relationship under this Schedule 1 is, and shall be, that of principal and agent, or principal and commissionaire.

7.1 Delivery of Free Licensed Applications via the App Store or Custom App Distribution​

If You would like Apple and/or an Apple Subsidiary to deliver Your Licensed Application or authorize additional content, functionality or services You make available in Your Licensed Application through the use of the In-App Purchase API to end-users for free (no charge) via the App Store or Custom App Distribution, then You appoint Apple and Apple Subsidiaries as Your legal agent and/or commissionaire pursuant to the terms of Schedule 1 for Licensed Applications designated by You as free-of-charge applications.

As we can see in their contract:

Apple Developer Program License Agreement - Agreements and Guidelines - Support - Apple Developer

Terms and conditions that govern membership in the Apple Developer Program.

developer.apple.com

1. Appointment of Agent and Commissionaire​

1.1 You hereby appoint Apple and Apple Subsidiaries (collectively “Apple”) as: (i) Your agent for the marketing and delivery of the Licensed Applications to End-Users located in those regions listed on Exhibit A, Section 1 to this Schedule 2, subject to change; and (ii) Your commissionaire for the marketing and delivery of the Licensed Applications to End-Users

3. Delivery of the Licensed Applications to End-Users​

3.1 You acknowledge and agree that Apple, in the course of acting as agent and/or commissionaire for You, is hosting, or pursuant to Section 1.2(b) of this Schedule 2 may enable authorized third parties to host, the Licensed Applications, and is allowing the download of those Licensed Applications by End-Users, on Your behalf. However, You are responsible for hosting and delivering content or services sold by You using the In-App Purchase API, except for content that is included within the Licensed Application itself (i.e., the In-App Purchase simply unlocks the content) or content hosted by Apple pursuant to section 3.3 of Attachment 2 to the Agreement. All of the Licensed Applications shall be marketed by Apple, on Your behalf, to End-Users at prices identified in a price tier and designated by You, in Your sole discretion, from the pricing schedule set forth in the App Store Connect tool, which may be updated from time to time by Apple.

3.4 Apple shall be entitled to the following commissions in consideration for its services as Your agent and/or commissionaire under this Schedule 2:

(a) For sales of Licensed Applications to End-Users, Apple shall be entitled to a commission equal to thirty percent (30%) of all prices payable by each End-User.

3.5 Upon collection of any amounts from any End-User as the price for any Licensed Application delivered to that End-User hereunder, Apple shall deduct the full amount of its commission with respect to that Licensed Application, and any taxes collected by Apple under Section 3.2 and 3.4

You hereby acknowledge and agree that Apple shall be entitled to a commission, in accordance with this Section 3.5 on the delivery of any Licensed Application to any End-User, even if Apple is unable to collect the price for that Licensed Application from that End-User.

Schedule 3​

1. Appointment of Agent and Commissionaire​

1.1 You hereby appoint Apple and Apple Subsidiaries (collectively “Apple”) as: (i) Your agent for the marketing, sale and delivery of Custom Applications via Custom App Distribution to Custom App Distribution Customers and applicable End-Users located in those regions listed on Exhibit A, Section 1 to this Schedule 3, subject to change; and (ii) Your commissionaire for the marketing, sale, and delivery of Custom Applications to Custom App Distribution Customers and applicable End-Users located in those regions listed on Exhibit A, Section 2 to this Schedule 3, subject to change, during the Delivery Period.

1.3 The parties acknowledge and agree that their relationship under this Schedule 3 is, and shall be, that of principal and agent, or principal and commissionaire, as the case may be, as described in Exhibit A, Section 1 and Exhibit A, Section 2, respectively, and that You, as principal, are, and shall be, solely responsible for any and all claims and liabilities involving or relating to, the Custom Applications, as provided in this Schedule 3

3. Delivery of the Custom Applications to End-Users​

3.1 You acknowledge and agree that Apple, in the course of acting as agent and/or commissionaire for You, is hosting the Custom Applications, providing Content Codes to Custom App Distribution Customers, and is allowing the download of the Custom Applications by End-Users, on Your behalf.

All of the Custom Applications shall be marketed by Apple, on Your behalf, to End-User Custom App Distribution Customers at prices identified in a price tier and designated by You.

3.5 Upon collection of any amounts from any Custom App Distribution Customer as the price for any Custom Application delivered to that Custom App Distribution Customer’s designated End-Users hereunder, Apple shall deduct the full amount of its commission with respect to that Custom Application, and any taxes collected by Apple under Section 3.2 and 3.4
You hereby acknowledge and agree that Apple shall be entitled to a commission, in accordance with this Section 3.5 on the delivery of any Content Codes to any Custom App Distribution Customer, even if Apple is unable to collect the price for that Custom Application from the Custom App Distribution Customer.

They did. They priced it at $99 plus the terms that included a commission.

Can you show that anywhere? They are very explicit in what you get for a 99€/year and what the commission covers as a fee for apple being your worldwide agent.

 

[BaldiMac]

Well that’s my bad, I should have said it’s my interpretation from the public information Apple have provided.

And if apple isn’t asking for a higher price then it’s reasonable to assume whatever apple makes is enough to cover the costs.

No, it's not. I already answered this clearly. Again,the full terms of the agreement (including fee and commission) were what was required. Not just the ones you pick and choose.

So can point to somewhere in the ToS or contract that obligates you to pay anything more than 99$ to get full access?

So now you are going to pretend that you don't know that the developer terms also require a commission on some sales? That's a dishonest argument.

Section 3.4.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

So again you claim things, but where do they actually say that?

Can you point to any evidence that a commission pays for any software, hardware, code, APIs etc?

No, it's not. I already answered this clearly. Again,the full terms of the agreement (including fee and commission) were what was required. Not just the ones you pick and choose.

Distribution of free (no charge) Applications (including those that use the In-App Purchase API for the delivery of free content) via the App Store or Custom App Distribution will be subject to the distribution terms contained in Schedule 1 to this Agreement. If You would like to distribute Applications for which You will charge a fee or would like to use the In-App Purchase API for the delivery of fee-based content, You must enter into a separate agreement with Apple (“Schedule 2”).

​

7.1 Delivery of Free Licensed Applications via the App Store or Custom App Distribution​

You appoint Apple and Apple Subsidiaries as Your legal agent and/or commissionaire pursuant to the terms of Schedule 1 for Licensed Applications designated by You as free-of-charge applications.

7.2 Schedule 2 and Schedule 3 for Fee-Based Licensed Applications; Receipts​

If Your Application qualifies as a Licensed Application and You intend to charge end-users a fee of any kind for Your Licensed Application or within Your Licensed Application through the use of the In-App Purchase API, You must enter into a separate agreement (Schedule 2) with Apple

So now you are going to pretend that you don't know that the developer terms also require a commission on some sales? That's a dishonest argument.

Section 3.4.

3.4 Apple shall be entitled to the following commissions in consideration for its services as Your agent and/or commissionaire under this Schedule 2:

the word commission is clearly defined:

commission​

a fee paid to an agent or employee for transacting a piece of business or performing a service
especially : a percentage of the money received from a total paid to the agent responsible for the business

 

[BaldiMac]

So again you claim things, but where do they actually say that?

As I said, section 3.4 which you quoted in your post.

Can you point to any evidence that a commission pays for any software, hardware, code, APIs etc?

Sure. It was established in the Epic trial that Apple's commission is how they are compensated for their IP.

From the ruling.
"First, and most significant, as discussed in the findings of facts, IAP is the method by which Apple collects its licensing fee from developers for the use of Apple’s intellectual property. Even in the absence of IAP, Apple could still charge a commission on developers. It would simply be more difficult for Apple to collect that commission."

 

[Sophisticatednut]

As I said, section 3.4 which you quoted in your post.


Sure. It was established in the Epic trial that Apple's commission is how they are compensated for their IP.

From the ruling.
"First, and most significant, as discussed in the findings of facts, IAP is the method by which Apple collects its licensing fee from developers for the use of Apple’s intellectual property. Even in the absence of IAP, Apple could still charge a commission on developers. It would simply be more difficult for Apple to collect that commission."

First of, US ruling doesn’t have any bearing on EU legal perspective. Especially if they are using a made up definition for commissionaire not supported by EU law.

And secondly in section 3.4 it doesn’t ever mention Apple IP, or the licensing of Apple IP or anything close to that.

Apple Developer Program License Agreement​

Terms and conditions that govern membership in the Apple DeveloperProgram and the distribution of free apps.

is a separate contract to these.

Xcode and Apple SDKs Agreement​

Terms and conditions that govern the use of Xcode developer tools and software development kits (SDKs).

Apple Developer Agreement​

Terms and conditions that govern the use of the Apple Developer website, beta software, events, and more.

Agreements and Guidelines - Support - Apple Developer

developer.apple.com

 

[BaldiMac]

First of, US ruling doesn’t have any bearing on EU legal perspective. Especially if they are using a made up definition for commissionaire not supported by EU law.

I didn't say that it did. You're just throwing around irrelevant terms. I provided direct evidence of my claim in response to your request.

And secondly in section 3.4 it doesn’t ever mention Apple IP, or the licensing of Apple IP or anything close to that.

So? Again, I didn't say that it did. I simply said that 3.4 describes the fees and commissions that developers agree to in the developer license agreement.

Apple Developer Program License Agreement​

Terms and conditions that govern membership in the Apple DeveloperProgram and the distribution of free apps.

is a separate contract to these.

Xcode and Apple SDKs Agreement​

Terms and conditions that govern the use of Xcode developer tools and software development kits (SDKs).

Apple Developer Agreement​

Terms and conditions that govern the use of the Apple Developer website, beta software, events, and more.

Agreements and Guidelines - Support - Apple Developer

developer.apple.com

Shockingly, you've once again posted completely unnecessary and redundant sources to our conversation without any context.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I didn't say that it did. You're just throwing around irrelevant terms. I provided direct evidence of my claim in response to your request.
So? Again, I didn't say that it did. I simply said that 3.4 describes the fees and commissions that developers agree to in the developer license agreement.
Shockingly, you've once again posted completely unnecessary and redundant sources to our conversation without any context.

Then why did you mention an irrelevant U.S. ruling that doesn’t prove anything? And what are you arguing about then?

My claim is that for the 99$ yearly payment as described in the developer agreement you sign provides you access to everything you might need to make a iOS/macOS application.

While the payment agreement you sign separately for being able to publish in the AppStore only describes
A commissions you pay for the privilege of appointing apples as your commissioner and sales agent who manages your sales and advertisement in your name.
It’s with context, it’s a link to the developer license agreement.

And this I support with the information plastered all over apples webpages and the contracts you sign with them.

I would say there’s not a single shred of public evidence that the commission is a fee for the OS, SDK, APIs, documentation, assistance.

If it is, there’s no information available to the public about that, and just baseless speculation.

 

[BaldiMac]

Then why did you mention an irrelevant U.S. ruling that doesn’t prove anything? And what are you arguing about then?

Perhaps if you bothered to follow our conversation you would understand. You asked for evidence that Apple considered the commission as payment for its IP. I provided direct evidence established in a court of law.

My claim is that for the 99$ yearly payment as described in the developer agreement you sign provides you access to everything you might need to make a iOS/macOS application.

I know because I've read your posts. If I sign an agreement to pay $100 plus $500 per month for two years, the total cost isn't $100.

While the payment agreement you sign separately for being able to publish in the AppStore only describes
A commissions you pay for the privilege of appointing apples as your commissioner and sales agent who manages your sales and advertisement in your name.
It’s with context, it’s a link to the developer license agreement.

Nope. It's not a separate agreement. As we've both posted, it's in section 3.4. It's a condition of membership in the developer program.

And this I support with the information plastered all over apples webpages and the contracts you sign with them.

I would say there’s not a single shred of public evidence that the commission is a fee for the OS, SDK, APIs, documentation, assistance.

If it is, there’s no information available to the public about that, and just baseless speculation.

Findings of fact in a court case is not "baseless speculation." And it is public.