Dutch Regulator Says Apple Shouldn't Force Dating Apps to Offer Separate App for Alternative Payments

[MacRumors]

The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) today fined Apple an additional five million euros for allegedly failing to satisfy the requirements it set regarding alternative payment systems for dating apps. This is the fourth consecutive week that the ACM has fined Apple, with the total penalty now standing at 20 million euros.

In a press release, the ACM said that Apple's requirement that dating app providers must submit a separate app binary in the Netherlands if they wish to offer alternative payment systems is unreasonable and disadvantageous.

The ACM said it also has concerns about a number of other requirements set by Apple, such as forcing dating apps to choose between the App Store's standard in-app purchase system or alternative payment systems. The competition regulator has previously said that dating apps must be able to offer both options in the Netherlands.

The ACM will continue to fine Apple five million euros per week, up to a maximum of 50 million euros, until it feels the company has fully complied with the order.

Earlier this month, Apple provided additional details for dating apps wishing to offer alternative payment systems in the Netherlands, including that it will charge a 27% commission on purchases made in dating apps that use alternative payment systems.

Apple has appealed the ACM's order, arguing that alternative payment systems in the App Store pose privacy and security risks for customers. Apple also said it would be unable to assist customers with refund requests, subscription management, and other issues encountered when purchasing digital goods and services through alternative systems.

Article Link: Dutch Regulator Says Apple Shouldn't Force Dating Apps to Offer Separate App for Alternative Payments

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

I think the penalties come too quick here. Charging it every week and stopping after just 10 weeks doesn't make sense.

Apple needs more time than a week to make the changes. Give them a month between each round of penalties. But also, don't stop doling out the penalties. And I'm not sure whether 5M Euros is an appropriate penalty. Whatever it is, it needs to be large enough for Apple to react, but not so large that Apple decides to just exit the market entirely rather than comply with the rules.

 

[grootmoeder]

The ACM is doing great work for us the consumers!

 

[gnomeisland]

It just seems like they are offering a foot to shoot here. Of course Apple will (rightfully, it is a big change and security liability) scrutinize apps that legally allow 3rd party payments more heavily. By having only one app you risk delaying updates for every country and forcing users to allow for geofencing and location tracking so the legally required "features" are available only in The Netherlands. Of all the international legal action against the App Store this one seems like they are writing the "what not to do" section of the playbook.

 

[MysticCow]

WHAT THE HELL DO THEY WANT APPLE TO DO? Honestly, send them a note stating, step by step, what The Government Thy God wants Apple to do. Until then, screw it all, because nothing Apple does will be enough to stop additional fines, it seems...

 

[erikkfi]

I suspect Apple is going to come to regret undertaking thermonuclear war on a European nation's regulatory body. You've got to think that the EU regulators are closely watching the way Apple is thumbing its nose at the situation and repeatedly violating both the letter and spirit of what the Netherlands agency is trying to do here.

 

[MallardDuck]

You know, I agree with not having multiple app stores. We all knew about the walled garden before we bought the phones, and their curation is definitely a strong way to enforce privacy regs.

But third party payment systems? Eh....that's a tougher one. Apple monetizes their investment via the app store and rev shares. If app can use third party payment systems, then how does apple get paid for their development tools and other infrastructure? Maybe force a flat 'listing fee' for apps that offer third party payments? Or require a minimum price for the app itself?

 

[kc9hzn]

Match Group already has it set up so you can get a subscription outside of the App Store and use it on the iOS app. And I’d trust Apple’s IAP policies over Match Group’s (Match Group is notorious for phantom subscriptions and locking you into long term subscriptions instead of monthly, and they’ve been caught with the “fake profile messages you to get you to pay for the upgrade that let’s you send messages” con before). Why is it always the most dodgy of developers complaining over Apple’s take?

 

[robco74]

Apple should just go all the way. Lower the commission for all apps in the Netherlands, shut down Apple's payment processing service there, and force all developers to use third-party payment providers.

 

[Danfango]

Dating apps are the one place apple should have control over payments. They are universally nasty rip off scum and the regulator here is doing the end users a disservice at the whim of the business.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

I think the penalties come too quick here. Charging it every week and stopping after just 10 weeks doesn't make sense.

Apple needs more time than a week to make the changes. Give them a month between each round of penalties. But also, don't stop doling out the penalties. And I'm not sure whether 5M Euros is an appropriate penalty. Whatever it is, it needs to be large enough for Apple to react, but not so large that Apple decides to just exit the market entirely rather than comply with the rules.

I agree. Charging it every week is too much. Maybe it's an easier approach for them to get money from Apple.

 

[mansplains]

...how does apple get paid for their development tools and other infrastructure? Maybe force a flat 'listing fee' for apps that offer third party payments? Or require a minimum price for the app itself?

I was thinking something like this as a counter and that's hard to quantify. They ask for these forced changes but don't really detail how it would work. Maybe cut off the developer resources you get for the $99 membership normally? Why give you the benefit if you won't pay into it.

 

[4jasontv]

In the spirit of today, would someone explain how Apple and AMC’s relationship will play out using an uncomfortably specific analogy.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Apple should just go all the way. Lower the commission for all apps in the Netherlands, shut down Apple's payment processing service there, and force all developers to use third-party payment providers.

"developers to use third-party payment providers."

Good point! But that's going to bring a lot of risk to privacy and security. It's not going to be good for the consumers.

 

[_Spinn_]

This is becoming a larger cluster every week...what a total headache.

 

[wanha]

WHAT THE HELL DO THEY WANT APPLE TO DO? Honestly, send them a note stating, step by step, what The Government Thy God wants Apple to do. Until then, screw it all, because nothing Apple does will be enough to stop additional fines, it seems...

Do you honestly not understand what they want Apple to do?

I mean, this isn't very complicated, but let me break it down for you:

The Dutch regulator has ordered Apple to give users multiple payment options.

Apple won't oblige and is instead forcing app developers to either choose to include Apple's own payment processor or an an outside party, but won't allow both.

It would seem the reason Apple is doing this is that they are counting on app developers not bothering to do all that work for a market as small as the Netherlands, thereby forcing the status quo to remain in place.

 

[wanha]

Quite fascinating that Apple is resisting (if not downright rejecting) so many of these policies set by regulators, because it is only driving up the tensions until Apple's App Store policies will be dictated by governments.

Surely it would make more sense for Apple to adopt a proactive stance on this topic and make most of the changes voluntarily and not once their hand is forced and they'll end up with whatever misguided law is applied to them?

 

[Joe The Dragon]

You know, I agree with not having multiple app stores. We all knew about the walled garden before we bought the phones, and their curation is definitely a strong way to enforce privacy regs.

But third party payment systems? Eh....that's a tougher one. Apple monetizes their investment via the app store and rev shares. If app can use third party payment systems, then how does apple get paid for their development tools and other infrastructure? Maybe force a flat 'listing fee' for apps that offer third party payments? Or require a minimum price for the app itself?

if apples cut was lower or there rules there not an mess.
Uber does not pay 30% but dateing?
and then again netflix has to pay but apple does host or make any of the netflix content.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

All this fuss over a few dating apps…
Users should just vote with their wallet - the virtual ‘roses’ wouldn’t cost five bucks.

 

[I7guy]

Quite fascinating that Apple is resisting (if not downright rejecting) so many of these policies set by regulators, because it is only driving up the tensions until Apple's App Store policies will be dictated by governments.

Surely it would make more sense for Apple to adopt a proactive stance on this topic and make most of the changes voluntarily and not once their hand is forced and they'll end up with whatever misguided law is applied to them?

Should be obvious there is no proactive stance forthcoming.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

I think that apple needs to do something before they are forced to go to far by the law.
Like Very limited content censorship / have rooms for stuff
as in the past apple was makeing European magazines adapt to the standards of Utah.
Very limited rules on what you can tell end users in app

 

[elvisimprsntr]

As Ive said before, "Dating" apps is a polite term for legal prostitution, which the Netherlands does not want to share the revenue with Apple. Government officials are likely the ones using said "Dating" apps, which they would like to prevent their significant others from finding out.

 

[BC2009]

The ACM is ridiculous. Expecting a multinational company like Apple to be able to special case dating apps in a specific country WITHOUT making developers submit 2 versions of the app shows a complete misunderstanding of how software development works.

A reason it has to be a separate sku AND pick one form of payment is so Apple SDK can carve out this special case without breaking every other kind of app and all apps for every other country.

This should simply be a link out to their website to pay. It warns the user and then launches Safari (not in-app WebView) and let’s the user go deal with the website to subscribe. This is what they should all agree on. In-app has the money go through Apple and web based has the money go through third party. And then tell them to account for Apple’s commission separately.

Apple should NOT have to provide or allow third party in-app purchasing because it can be abused to look like Apple purchasing and can confuse the user. Apple should also not be preventing links to purchasing on the open web.

 

[BC2009]

As Ive said before, "Dating" apps is a polite term for legal prostitution, which the Netherlands does not want to share the revenue with Apple. Government officials are likely the ones using said "Dating" apps, which they would like to prevent their significant others from finding out.

You’ve nailed it. They don’t want their cheating on their spouses to be scrutinized.

 

[kc9hzn]

All this fuss over a few dating apps…
Users should just vote with their wallet - the virtual ‘roses’ wouldn’t cost five bucks.

Honestly, as an on and off dating site user, I don’t think most of these in-app purchases actually have any value in attracting the attention of profiles you’re interested in. They might put you at the front of the queue for profiles you’ve swiped right on, but they don’t actually help you get matches unless your profile is great and your photos are great.

And it’s a dirty little secret in online dating that the apps and services are a little like buying Cosmo magazine for dating advice. They want to sabotage you so you’ll keep paying for the service/buying issues of Cosmo. The incentives just aren’t there for them to want to actually help you succeed in using the apps (unless maybe you’re just using Tinder for hookups multiple times a week and move on to a different partner once you’ve scored). If you meet someone and start a relationship, there’s no longer any reason for you to use the app or to pay for it.