Dutch Regulator Says Apple's Plan for Third-Party In-App Payments is Insufficient, Fines Apple 5 Million Euros

[Sophisticatednut]

It makes me wonder why developers even bothered making apps for iOS in the first place.

To make money

The store is crap... the fees are insane... it's missing basic features... etc.

It’s still makes them money. Just as when children worked at factories or corporations payed in corporate vouchers only usable in their towns etc etc

You know there are other jobs than being an app developer, right?

Indeed, there will still be regulations in every sector.

Time to find a new career. I hear everywhere is hiring...

Perhaps apple should find another market if they don’t like the local laws and regulations

Exactly, if the only thing Apple is NOT going to be doing is payment processing then that is only a small percentage of the existing commission they charge. So the existing commission will only drop by a small amount to account for the fact Apple will no longer be the payment processor.

Apple is doing literally only payment processing with in app purchases. The commission will very likely drop 100%. in the store apple can keep their commission.

Payment processing does not cost 15-30%

Apple does

They cant/won’t. Selling goods and services is how capitalist, market economies work. No government is going to tell a company they cannot sell their goods and services for a fee.

You would be surprised, this have already happened. Nobody is telling apple can’t sell their goods and services for a fee. People are saying apple can’t force developers to use their services if they don’t want it outside the store. It’s anti competitive

Wasn’t apple ready to pull out of the UK over some patent disputes? Maybe they should kick dating apps out of the App Store.

Sure go ahead, this will just happen with another category. daring apps are the ones who filed the complaints.

Sure. Let’s have our government pass laws that limit commissions and fees. And let’s start with car dealerships. If that occurs I’ll be the first to support limits on the fees of digital goods.

Luckily we already have this fixed in Europe so you can join us to limit fees on digital goods. Can’t help America is behind the regulatory curve for consumer freedoms.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

We pay low mobile phone and ISP fees in the UK but that’s because we have lots of competition.

It’s almost like the smartphone operating system market needs more competitors….

And you have a maximu electricity cost as well. **** it’s like in Europe things are way different than USA

 

[mrochester]

To make money

It’s still makes them money. Just as when children worked at factories or corporations payed in corporate vouchers only usable in their towns etc etc

Indeed, there will still be regulations in every sector.

Perhaps apple should find another market if they don’t like the local laws and regulations

Apple is doing literally only payment processing with in app purchases. The commission will very likely drop 100%. in the store apple can keep their commission.

Apple does

You would be surprised, this have already happened. Nobody is telling apple can’t sell their goods and services for a fee. People are saying apple can’t force developers to use their services if they don’t want it outside the store. It’s anti competitive

Sure go ahead, this will just happen with another category. daring apps are the ones who filed the complaints.

Luckily we already have this fixed in Europe so you can join us to limit fees on digital goods. Can’t help America is behind the regulatory curve for consumer freedoms.

And that’s why Apple’s commission would go down a few % points to take out what they’d be saving on not being the payment processor.

 

[mrochester]

And you have a maximu electricity cost as well. **** it’s like in Europe things are way different than USA

We do, and that’s actually a market that needs regulating since it should be a public utility, not a private for profit business.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Perhaps Apple should find another market if they don’t like the local laws and regulations

Perhaps...

But where were these laws and regulations in 2008 when the App Store first opened and everyone got introduced to the 30% commission for the first time?

I know the wheels of justice turn slowly... but come on!

 

[I7guy]

[...]

Sure go ahead, this will just happen with another category. daring apps are the ones who filed the complaints.

Luckily we already have this fixed in Europe so you can join us to limit fees on digital goods. Can’t help America is behind the regulatory curve for consumer freedoms.

Sure didn't facebook shut down in Australia and the government came crawling asking for them to return? No damage to facebook. Stupid is as stupid does by the government. I don't think Apple is really afraid. If they threatened to pull out of the UK over $7B, losing a couple of bucks to the dating apps in the Netherlands is nothing to the bottom line.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Yeah id like my food cheaper from the supermarket. Let’s make the government mandate they give it away for free because I don’t like the fact they charge for it.

This what you people don’t seem to understand. Apple can take a fee in the store. But after I as a consumer have made the purchase the app is no longer in apple’s domain, and therefore no longer under apples right to demand payment. It’s on my device I own.

Consumers don’t license the use of the device in EU. They own it. A shrink wrap contract have no legal legitimacy for consumer electronics currently.

This makes the app download from apple servers to be on a consumer owned device.

We own apps as it on the button it says “buy” or “download” it doesn’t say rent, license or any other terms.

Apple will play its hand and it will not end well.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Perhaps...

But where were these laws and regulations in 2008 when the App Store first opened and everyone got introduced to the 30% commission for the first time?

I know the wheels of justice turn slowly... but come on!

Nobody filed a complaint and apple was not a dominated market. Just as Microsoft was fined just in 2004 for bundling internet explorer and later forced to include competing browsers in every windows copy sold in EU. But this didn’t happen before oracle filed a complaint with the regulators

 

[vipergts2207]

We pay low mobile phone and ISP fees in the UK but that’s because we have lots of competition.

It’s almost like the smartphone operating system market needs more competitors….

You should start one then. Surely you’ll succeed where Microsoft and RIM failed.

 

[UBS28]

This what you people don’t seem to understand. Apple can take a fee in the store. But after I as a consumer have made the purchase the app is no longer in apple’s domain, and therefore no longer under apples right to demand payment. It’s on my device I own.

Consumers don’t license the use of the device in EU. They own it. A shrink wrap contract have no legal legitimacy for consumer electronics currently.

This makes the app download from apple servers to be on a consumer owned device.

We own apps as it on the button it says “buy” or “download” it doesn’t say rent, license or any other terms.

Apple will play its hand and it will not end well.

These cheapskates who want to make use of the Apple platform should simply pay for it. Apple created this platform thus they should be rewarded if people make money by using their platform.

If you want to attack Apple, you should attack them for real BS things like how they are screwing over cloud gaming from Microsoft. This isn't one of them.

 

[mrochester]

This what you people don’t seem to understand. Apple can take a fee in the store. But after I as a consumer have made the purchase the app is no longer in apple’s domain, and therefore no longer under apples right to demand payment. It’s on my device I own.

Consumers don’t license the use of the device in EU. They own it. A shrink wrap contract have no legal legitimacy for consumer electronics currently.

This makes the app download from apple servers to be on a consumer owned device.

We own apps as it on the button it says “buy” or “download” it doesn’t say rent, license or any other terms.

Apple will play its hand and it will not end well.

The app on your device uses Apple’s intellectual property (the app will call Apple APIs to interact with device functionality). That is the use that Apple will license to the developer for a fee (in this case, the fee is based on a % of revenue made in that app selling digital goods for use in that app).

There is no app from the apple App Store that does not use Apple‘s technology on an on-going basis. Apple does not sell that IP to developers for a one time fee. They sell it for a one time fee AND a % commission.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Are dating apps in the Netherlands allowed to have a web browser inside the app?

Seems like the user could pop open a webview in the app and login to the dating website using their credentials.

Or just... use Safari on the iPhone in their hand.

?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Sure didn't facebook shut down in Australia and the government came crawling asking for them to return? No damage to facebook. Stupid is as stupid does by the government. I don't think Apple is really afraid. If they threatened to pull out of the UK over $7B, losing a couple of bucks to the dating apps in the Netherlands is nothing to the bottom line.

As far as I know they have still not changed their position. They only banned sharing of news on their website because a law states Facebook and google etc would have to pay news websites a “link tax” for linking to their news articles .
They negotiated amendments but I haven’t followed it so don’t know what it entails.

The difference here is Netherlands is part and the heart of EU. This makes it extremely volatile for literally the entire EU block to turn on apple as it have been doing with American companies to pay more taxes. UK and Australia is relatively small

 

[mrochester]

This what you people don’t seem to understand. Apple can take a fee in the store. But after I as a consumer have made the purchase the app is no longer in apple’s domain, and therefore no longer under apples right to demand payment. It’s on my device I own.

Consumers don’t license the use of the device in EU. They own it. A shrink wrap contract have no legal legitimacy for consumer electronics currently.

This makes the app download from apple servers to be on a consumer owned device.

We own apps as it on the button it says “buy” or “download” it doesn’t say rent, license or any other terms.

Apple will play its hand and it will not end well.

EULAs are enforceable as long as the consumer actively agrees to it and has the ability to return a product if they don’t agree to the terms.

IIRC Apple asks users to agree to the EULA twice when setting up a device, and they also have a no quibble returns policy if you want to return a device for whatever reason.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

The app on your device uses Apple’s intellectual property (the app will call Apple APIs to interact with device functionality). That is the use that Apple will license to the developer for a fee (in this case, the fee is based on a % of revenue made in that app selling digital goods for use in that app).

That’s not how intellectual property laws work. Calling an API isn’t something you license. Using the code is what you license, such as when oracle sued google for using their APIs in android without license.
The api apple use to interact with their Samsung screen is not copyrighted. The code is exactly the same as Samsung uses on their phones.

Every single website, video and other thing you interact with that doesn’t come from the App Store owns no commission to apple.

Every app on cydia have zero legal obligation to pay apple anything because they don’t have any legal ability to claim it. Just as google have zero legal ability to claim a commission from third party stores etc etc

There is no app from the apple App Store that does not use Apple‘s technology on an on-going basis. Apple does not sell that IP to developers for a one time fee. They sell it for a one time fee AND a % commission.

100% of them doesn’t use their IP. Come back when apple, google or Microsoft or any company of your choosing when they win such a claim. They have never in the history of capitalism won such a lawsuit for calling for a function but not paying for this privilege.

Only when a company have actually included the API code have they won.

Intiell sued chip manufacturers for including x86 code without license.
Intel sued Microsoft for using x86 code in their windowsARM to x86 emulator.
Oracle sued google for including their API in android etc etc.

Intel will never be able to sue anyone for calling X86 instructions or ask for payment.
Intel will never be-able to sue apple for translating x86 code to ARM because they never use their APIs.

Only thing apple
License is their SDK Xcode for developers to use and they license the ability to be on their store or use their iCloud services.

 

[mrochester]

That’s not how intellectual property laws work. Calling an API isn’t something you license. Using the code is what you license, such as when oracle sued google for using their APIs in android without license.
The api apple use to interact with their Samsung screen is not copyrighted. The code is exactly the same as Samsung uses on their phones.

Every single website, video and other thing you interact with that doesn’t come from the App Store owns no commission to apple.

Every app on cydia have zero legal obligation to pay apple anything because they don’t have any legal ability to claim it. Just as google have zero legal ability to claim a commission from third party stores etc etc

100% of them doesn’t use their IP. Come back when apple, google or Microsoft or any company of your choosing when they win such a claim. They have never in the history of capitalism won such a lawsuit for calling for a function but not paying for this privilege.

Only when a company have actually included the API code have they won.

Intiell sued chip manufacturers for including x86 code without license.
Intel sued Microsoft for using x86 code in their windowsARM to x86 emulator.
Oracle sued google for including their API in android etc etc.

Intel will never be able to sue anyone for calling X86 instructions or ask for payment.
Intel will never be-able to sue apple for translating x86 code to ARM because they never use their APIs.

Only thing apple
License is their SDK Xcode for developers to use and they license the ability to be on their store or use their iCloud services.

Why is it something Apple can’t chose to license?

 

[OnawaAfrica]

Well looking how terribly designed teh app store is made, the removal of iTunes as a useful tool on Windows and their removal of the ability to browse App store on your computer to find apps is removed would say 0-1% of the revenue goes back to improve the service. There isn't even a good way to report apps.

well I don't think the App Store is band designed. its by far better than googles play store or Microsofts App Store.
iTunes is still available for Windows.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

EULAs are enforceable as long as the consumer actively agrees to it and has the ability to return a product if they don’t agree to the terms.

IIRC Apple asks users to agree to the EULA twice when setting up a device, and they also have a no quibble returns policy if you want to return a device for whatever reason.

EULA aren’t enforceable if they are precented after a purchase is made.

A consumer can’t actively agree to an agreement they can’t access. This is the standard we have in EU.

A contract of ownership is already made when you exchange money. The EULA being presented during the startup of the device isn’t relevant when you already own it.

For example in Sweden you lose your right to return a phone the second you open the package in 100% of physical stores

 

[mrochester]

EULA aren’t enforceable if they are precented after a purchase is made.

A consumer can’t actively agree to an agreement they can’t access. This is the standard we have in EU.

A contract of ownership is already made when you exchange money. The EULA being presented during the startup of the device isn’t relevant when you already own it.

For example in Sweden you lose your right to return a phone the second you open the package in 100% of physical stores

I think if nothing else it is a grey area, but with reference to Apple’s commission this is between Apple and developers. Developers agree to terms and conditions prior to beginning to any development so I don’t know how they wouldn’t then be legally enforceable for apple to collect the commission those developers agreed to.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Why is it something Apple can’t chose to license?

Because they don’t own the code developers use. It’s like FORD would try to license the ability to pour in oil to their engine. They can license the design of their engine or how the container is designed, but they can’t license the ability of a third party seller of engine oil to have the ability to use the opening.

well I don't think the App Store is band designed. its by far better than googles play store or Microsofts App Store.
iTunes is still available for Windows.

You have no ability to pause subscription, you can’t report apps not working, you can’t browse the App Store on the computer anymore. iTunes used to have an actual store section making the ability to find apps easy and convenient on a bigger screen.

Now it’s deprecated and you can only use the iPhone or iPad to do so. iTunes might have been clunky but having the ability to browse the store on your PC or Mac was a good thing when you looked for new apps.

It’s very clunky if I want to look at the best free GPS apps or only the payed versions. Or look up specific categories etc etc. these are clunky if I might want to compare 10 apps as I perhaps plan for a trip and want to find the best GPS app for hiking, best signtseeing app, best translation app or public transport app etc etc.

I become forced to google search list other people already created as on the iPhone you can only look at own app at a time for obvious reasons, on the computer you must know the app to find it as you can’t just browse the store etc.

For example when I want to find Xbox games I browse on my computer or their online store because it’s just clunky on console itself.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I think if nothing else it is a grey area, but with reference to Apple’s commission this is between Apple and developers. Developers agree to terms and conditions prior to beginning to any development so I don’t know how they wouldn’t then be legally enforceable for apple to collect the commission those developers agreed to.

Because it’s now under investigation as anti competitive behavior. Just because you agree to terms and conditions doesn’t make them legal.

Just as apple now is suing Ericsson and want to skip paying for their patents after the contract ended

 

[mrochester]

Because they don’t own the code developers use. It’s like FORD would try to license the ability to pour in oil to their engine. They can license the design of their engine or how the container is designed, but they can’t license the ability of a third party seller of engine oil to have the ability to use the opening.

You have no ability to pause subscription, you can’t report apps not working, you can’t browse the App Store on the computer anymore. iTunes used to have an actual store section making the ability to find apps easy and convenient on a bigger screen.

Now it’s deprecated and you can only use the iPhone or iPad to do so. iTunes might have been clunky but having the ability to browse the store on your PC or Mac was a good thing when you looked for new apps.

It’s very clunky if I want to look at the best free GPS apps or only the payed versions. Or look up specific categories etc etc. these are clunky if I might want to compare 10 apps as I perhaps plan for a trip and want to find the best GPS app for hiking, best signtseeing app, best translation app or public transport app etc etc.

I become forced to google search list other people already created as on the iPhone you can only look at own app at a time for obvious reasons, on the computer you must know the app to find it as you can’t just browse the store etc.

For example when I want to find Xbox games I browse on my computer or their online store because it’s just clunky on console itself.

Of course they own the code developers use…

 

[mrochester]

Because it’s now under investigation as anti competitive behavior. Just because you agree to terms and conditions doesn’t make them legal.

Just as apple now is suing Ericsson and want to skip paying for their patents after the contract ended

It’s not under investigation. No one has said Apple can’t collect a commission.

 

[I7guy]

You should start one then. Surely you’ll succeed where Microsoft and RIM failed.

Perfect example of post that shows that there is no legal barrier to entering a market and consumers have voted with their $$$.

As far as I know they have still not changed their position. They only banned sharing of news on their website because a law states Facebook and google etc would have to pay news websites a “link tax” for linking to their news articles .
They negotiated amendments but I haven’t followed it so don’t know what it entails.

The difference here is Netherlands is part and the heart of EU. This makes it extremely volatile for literally the entire EU block to turn on apple as it have been doing with American companies to pay more taxes. UK and Australia is relatively small

It may not work out the way you think it would work out.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Of course they own the code developers use…

But they don’t own their developers code. And developers aren’t using apple code. They just ask the is to do something. That’s it.

Perfect example of post that shows that there is no legal barrier to entering a market and consumers have voted with their $$$.

It may not work out the way you think it would work out.

Well I have no idea how it will work out as I don’t have a position ether way