Dutch Regulators to Meet With Dating App Providers to Assess Apple's Plan for Alternate In-App Payment Options

[MacRumors]

The Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) in the Netherlands plans to assess Apple's announced plans for allowing dating apps on the App Store in the country to use third-party payment methods, ensuring those plans "meet the requirements" of a previous ruling.

Over the weekend, Apple announced that it would exclusively allow dating apps on the App Store in the Netherlands to use third-party payment methods for in-app purchases. The rule change is the first of its kind for Apple, which previously required all developers worldwide to use its own system for all in-app purchases.

Apple's concessions came following a December ruling from the ACM that, by restricting dating apps from using third-party payment methods, Apple is engaging in an "abuse of market power." The ACM threatened to fine Apple up to a maximum of 50 million euros per week if it did not change its policies.

Now that Apple has announced changes, the ACM wants to assess whether those changes meet the requirements of its previous ruling, according to a press release. As part of its probe into the changes, the ACM will meet with dating app providers, such as The Match Group, which owns Tinder, to ensure Apple's changes sufficiently address concerns.

While Apple will allow dating apps in the Netherlands to use third-party payment methods, there are some caveats to the concessions. Importantly, Apple will continue to receive a commission even for purchases made outside the App Store in-app purchasing system, although Apple has yet to reveal what that commission rate will be.

Developers will also be required to maintain separate app binaries for distribution in the Netherlands if they choose to offer alternate in-app purchasing options.

From a user experience perspective, Apple is warning that by using third-party payment methods, the experience of requesting a refund, managing subscriptions, viewing purchase history, and more will be made significantly more complicated.

Because Apple will not be directly aware of purchases made using alternative methods, Apple will not be able to assist users with refunds, purchase history, subscription management, and other issues encountered when purchasing digital goods and services through these alternative purchasing methods. You will be responsible for addressing such issues with customers.

Apple said it plans to appeal the ACM's ruling and has expressed concern that the order "could compromise the user experience, and create new threats to user privacy and data security."

Article Link: Dutch Regulators to Meet With Dating App Providers to Assess Apple's Plan for Alternate In-App Payment Options

 

[The Phazer]

Apple and Google are very desperate to think this commission idea will fly with global regulators. It won't.

 

[neuropsychguy]

Apple and Google are very desperate to think this commission idea will fly with global regulators. It won't.

So what’s the solution? Allow app developers to pay nothing to Apple? Apple makes developers pay developer fees based on app downloads? What’s the incentive for Apple to have an App Store if there is no commission?

Regulators/governments are going to lose if they get to force Apple to work for free.

 

[elvisimprsntr]

“Dating apps?” So that’s what they call it now? Right!

 

[MauiPa]

Apple and Google are very desperate to think this commission idea will fly with global regulators. It won't.

Im glad you can see the future. From a private company's perspective, which companies are required to list products on their stores, provide advertising, all completely free? My guess is none. The real question is not what Apple and Google are dong that customers seem to prefer, but why third party app stores aren't proliferating. It would be very easy to set up an App Store that links to Apple's for download purposes only, then manage the payment and subscriptions completely outside of Apple. Kind of the Spotify and Netflix model (sure you can get a subscription to Spotify through the App Store, but virtually no one does, and if the do, they want the trust and security that comes with it, otherwise they go direct through Spotify, so yah, virtually no one).

These clowns should just act and stop whining already

 

[LoveTo]

Is ‘Dating apps’ such a huge deal there that there are special government rules!!? If they had made a rule for social media apps, which would include dating apps too, it was understandable. Also, I wonder the greedy chat app companies would label themselves as dating apps to avail this payment functionality.

 

[BootsWalking]

Apple's concessions came following a December ruling from the ACM that, by restricting dating apps from using third-party payment methods, Apple is engaging in an "abuse of market power."

While Apple will allow dating apps in the Netherlands to use third-party payment methods, there are some caveats to the concessions. Importantly, Apple will continue to receive a commission even for purchases made outside the App Store in-app purchasing system, although Apple has yet to reveal what that commission rate will be.


The prosecution rests your honor.

 

[tucupeis]

so, apple has to list an app for free, and collect no commission on in app purchases? why would apple want to maintain such an app store?

 

[now i see it]

“and create new threats to user privacy and data security."

Like every online retailer on the internet. Oh how scary.

 

[icanhazmac]

Great, no more free dating apps for the Dutch, all dating apps should now be $49.99. Apple has to get paid somehow.

 

[elvisimprsntr]

Is ‘Dating apps’ such a huge deal there that there are special government rules!!? If they had made a rule for social media apps, which would include dating apps too, it was understandable. Also, I wonder the greedy chat app companies would label themselves as dating apps to avail this payment functionality.

Prostitution is legal in the Netherlands and is taxed by the government. I suspect the government and industry doesn’t want to share its revenue with Apple.

 

[Xiao_Xi]

what’s the solution?

Consider iOS and Android as a FRAND patent and establish a fair fee that covers the development of Apple and Google IP. If it works with hardware IP, why can it not work with software IP?

 

[LeadingHeat]

This is I’m sure just the beginning of the snowball. This isn’t sustainable for Apple to be forced to host these apps for free without being compensated. Think of Amazon, or any brick and mortar store. You can’t post a product listing on there saying “hey, don’t buy from here cause we’ll have to pay a fee. Instead, meet us in the back alley and we’ll sell you the same thing. Totally legit don’t worry”.

Sure it’s not perfect and anything this big will surely have holes where things get through, but I’d still like to see these separate app stores and alternative payment methods not pass.

 

[Scipster]

Out of curiosity, what is the current "experience of requesting a refund" through Apple? I thought Apple did not allow refunds for in-app purchases of digital content, no? Hence the enhanced parental controls on purchases?

 

[sw1tcher]

So what’s the solution? Allow app developers to pay nothing to Apple? Apple makes developers pay developer fees based on app downloads?

App developers already pay Apple an annual developer fee.

What's that? Why should Apple provide develoers access to their App Store for nothing more than an annual fee? Well, Apple already does for Netflix, Amazon, Starbucks, Robinhood, etc since Apple doesn't get a cut from the usage of those apps, right?

In a way these smaller developers are subsidizing the app store for these large corporations.

Another option is to allow users to get their apps outside of Apple's App store, that way Apple doesn't have to worry about these developers freeloading off Apple like Netflix, Amazon, Starbucks, Robinhood, etc do.

What’s the incentive for Apple to have an App Store if there is no commission?

The incentive is iDevice sales because if there's no convenient way for the masses to get their favorate apps, then iDevice sales will decline/people will move to Android.

I'd imagine most people will choose Apple's in-app payment method for convenience anyways. The number of people who'd choose to use another payment method that gives the app developer a larger cut will be small. It should still be an option though. Make available both payment options and let the user decide which they want to us. Unless Apple is afraid of competition.

 

[sw1tcher]

This is I’m sure just the beginning of the snowball. This isn’t sustainable for Apple to be forced to host these apps for free without being compensated. Think of Amazon, or any brick and mortar store.

Interesting that you mention Amazon. Isn't Apple hosting the Amazon app (and many others such as Netflix, Spotify, Robinhood, Coinbase, etc) for free, or does Apple get a cut from each of their transactions?

 

[jlc1978]

So what’s the solution? Allow app developers to pay nothing to Apple? Apple makes developers pay developer fees based on app downloads? What’s the incentive for Apple to have an App Store if there is no commission?

None. Apple will simply find other ways to make up for teh lost revenue. Hosting fees, fees per d/l, fees for app review, etc., all of which will wind up hurting the small developers if upfront costs increase. Right now, a developer fronts almost none of the costs of distribution since they don't pay until a sale is made.

App developers already pay Apple an annual developer fee.

What's that? Why should Apple provide develoers access to their App Store for nothing more than an annual fee? Well, Apple already does for Netflix, Amazon, Starbucks, Robinhood, etc since Apple doesn't get a cut from the usage of those apps, right?

They could just raise the fees. That no doubt would get rid of a lot of teh junk on teh store when developers can't afford them.

Apple's concessions came following a December ruling from the ACM that, by restricting dating apps from using third-party payment methods, Apple is engaging in an "abuse of market power."

While Apple will allow dating apps in the Netherlands to use third-party payment methods, there are some caveats to the concessions. Importantly, Apple will continue to receive a commission even for purchases made outside the App Store in-app purchasing system, although Apple has yet to reveal what that commission rate will be.


The prosecution rests your honor.

There is nothing contradictory in those two positions. Apple can let them sell via 3rd party payments while still charging for access to the App Store.

 

[sw1tcher]

so, apple has to list an app for free, and collect no commission on in app purchases? why would apple want to maintain such an app store?

Apple does this for many apps aleady, or does Apple get a cut from each transaction made through Amazon app, Target app, Walmart app, Starbucks app, Robinhood app, Coinbase app, etc.?

 

[I7guy]

Apple does this for many apps aleady, or does Apple get a cut from each transaction made through Amazon app, Target app, Walmart app, Starbucks app, Robinhood app, Coinbase app, etc.?

There are some some specific exemptions to when commissions are collected and not.

 

[falainber]

This is I’m sure just the beginning of the snowball. This isn’t sustainable for Apple to be forced to host these apps for free without being compensated. Think of Amazon, or any brick and mortar store. You can’t post a product listing on there saying “hey, don’t buy from here cause we’ll have to pay a fee. Instead, meet us in the back alley and we’ll sell you the same thing. Totally legit don’t worry”.

Sure it’s not perfect and anything this big will surely have holes where things get through, but I’d still like to see these separate app stores and alternative payment methods not pass.

You are confused. Apple is charging for services they do not provide (dating). That should be illegal. They can charge for distributing the app. But if they start abusing this too, then the governments should mandate alternative app stores.

 

[sw1tcher]

There are some some specific exemptions to when commissions are collected and not.

In other words, Apple is okay with hosting (some) apps for free and collect no commission from those apps... something tucupeis, LeadingHeat, rbgaynor, and others seem to have a problem with.

 

[ksec]

Apple should trust its supporter as they have shown on Macrumors!

Apple should not bow down to Dutch Regulators! Pull out of the Netherland! Show them the power of Apple Empire.

 

[citysnaps]

So what’s the solution? Allow app developers to pay nothing to Apple? Apple makes developers pay developer fees based on app downloads? What’s the incentive for Apple to have an App Store if there is no commission?

Regulators/governments are going to lose if they get to force Apple to work for free.

Spot on! So many think that Apple should be some kind of charity and give away services for free, having no idea what their costs are and not realizing that without a decent profit margin there will be no incentive to offer such services.

 

[Kkspire]

I would not want to do business in these environments. A government saying who can bill who for a dating app seems incredibly stupid…

 

[ksec]

Out of curiosity, what is the current "experience of requesting a refund" through Apple? I thought Apple did not allow refunds for in-app purchases of digital content, no? Hence the enhanced parental controls on purchases?

Not sure where you get that idea. Apple absolutely refund digital purchase. To the point a lot of people abuse it in Mobile Gaming. On the other hand it is handy for those people who really did make mistakes.