Ok so why could Apple enforce a outside iOS App Store fee
When they don’t do that for Netflix or Spotify for example?
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.
Epic Games Setting Up Webshops for iOS Developers to Offer Users Out-of-App Purchases
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When they don’t do that for Netflix or Spotify for example?
Nothing is prohibiting them from doing so. Just because they haven’t charged to date doesn’t mean they can’t start charging now.
Developers sign a legally-binding agreement to abide by Apple’s rules. Spotify and Netflix were using a loophole in those rules to avoid paying Apple, and Apple clearly thought keeping the loophole was worth allowing the actually free apps exist on the store (and probably don’t want the huge accounting overhead that it would have brought).
I’d also argue that clicking a link inside an iOS app that goes to a payment page on the web clearly involves the use of Apple’s property, whereas there is no way to confirm that someone who didn’t click on a link to the payment page inside the app even owned an Apple device when they signed up.
To be clear, I’m not advocating for this - my preference is Apple not charge the commission at all. I just don’t think the government is allowed to tell Apple they are prohibited from doing so.
(I’d also point out that nothing in the judge’s original order said that they couldn’t charge a commission, and her order this week was clearly angry about how Apple came to the 27% rate, not that the commission existed at all.)
The government are not saying that Apple can’t make a commission on IAP just they are not allowed on website purchases because then there is nothing stopping Apple or google saying we want commission if you buy something using chrome or safari
Clicking on safri to make a purchase on the Celtic store is using Apple’s property that is why they are not entitled to any commission
Because you could use that logic with any product bought using an iPhone?
There is nothing stopping Apple from implementing a policy that says app developers must use IAP however what will happen is probably YouTube for example sell premium for 15.99 using IAP but then offer a link that shows it as 12.99
why shouldn’t they? If the ruling turns out to be reversed, they are free to reinforce their former rules or apply some new ones about outside payments.
Again, the only point I’m making is that the government saying “you’re not allowed to charge a commission on link outs” is arguably unconstitutional in the US. At least one lawyer I know agrees with me that it being unconstitutional is certainly an acceptable reading of the law that will probably need to be adjudicated.
Whether or not it should be constitutional, is a good idea, etc. doesn’t have any bearing on it whatsoever. Just because we want something to be allowed/not allowed doesn’t matter - it’s how judges interpret the words in the constitution and relevant laws that do.
Well, websites haven’t signed an agreement with Apple that includes language on how they’re allowed to use Apple’s intellectual property for one thing. They don’t host their website on Apple’s App Store either. Their websites aren’t designed and built using Apple’s technology, developer tools, etc. (Apple’s property) and aren’t written to exclusively work on Apple’s devices.
To put it another way - iOS apps wouldn’t function without Apple’s involvement (i.e. Apple’s property); the websites absolutely would.
I agree that is a reasonable compromise that I personally would like, since I’d prefer to pay a slight premium to buy through Apple and not give my info to developers and have access to easy cancelation, parental controls etc. I am not sure that’s allowed by the order, however. I’d have to go back and look at it.
Because then they would be allowed to charge a percentage for making purchases on the internet that’s the point
That’s why there is no commission on it
Do Target and Walmart get a cut of every purchase made on an iPhone if that iPhone was originally purchased there? No? Then we’re not talking about the same thing.
there is no difference from me going on safari to pay for Netflix & then coming out of safari to then watch Netflix on the iOS app that was written for the iOS device so then that is exactly the same as a payment link because I’m still using Apple’s technology just not paying for it in the app just like a payment link it’s the same difference.
Yeah this payment link is going to kill the Apple IAP in a short period of time
Because once they show a cheaper price then most will use that option
Because if Apple are allowed to take commissions for sales made on the internet then there is no stopping google saying your using chrome so we want a percentage of sales because your using our product
There is a difference. One using on web technologies and the other is not.
That’s the difference.
Sure, that’s what the appeal is about.
Then Spotify should withdraw its app from the iOS App Store. Why should Apple allow freeloaders.
How are Spotify free loading when they pay the required fee that Apple charges
It’s not free loading if you follow the rules is it
My guess is because from Apple's POV, they have no way of telling when a link brings you from within the Netflix app to their website, or when a link redirects users from the Fortnite app (or some other freemium game) to an external payment site to make payment in order to purchase in-game credits from within the app.
Let's take your scenario to its logical conclusion. Say every developer has the option of linking outside of the App Store in order to not pay Apple a cut. Eventually, we may see all apps in the App Store be offered free of charge, with an IAP to unlock full functionality. Payment will be made not via iTunes, bit through a link which brings you to a website operated by stripe or some other payment processing company.
Perhaps this rule should apply only to games and exclude non-gaming apps like Netflix, Spotify and even the Hey app (which would, amongst other things, allow users to finally purchase ebooks), but right now, Apple does not seem to care about making such a distinction.
Well it’s not because I watch Netflix on iOS & how I subscribed I had to go on the web to make the purchase then back to the iOS app
To watch
Is that not fundamentally the same with a payment link that you will make the payment online on the internet & not in the app?
Just for clarification that’s actually not why there’s no commission on it. The judge made no reference at all to anything close to that argument.
In fact, the judge’s order didn’t say charging a commission wasn’t allowed. It said: Apple came to a commission that isn’t based on anything other than “that’s the number we want” and appeared to be so high that it was designed to steer developers to not use the link, and because Apple implemented it in bad faith, and then lied about it in court, they are now prohibited from charging commission as punishment.
I strongly suspect had Apple instituted a 12% commission, and backed that number up with data that explained clearly how they came to it, the judge wouldn’t have prohibited it.
Because they are greedy and because of that greed then they are now faced with the option of having to allow payment links that will eventually kill IAP profits for Apple.
Where as if they done a deal with epic they wouldn’t be here now would they
As I said earlier, Epic’s endgame is to be able to get their own game store onto iOS where they can keep 100% of IAP revenue, as well as host other developers’ apps and charge them a cut.
In this regard, there is no deal or compromise that would have made both parties happy. Not forgetting that Epic violated the App Store rules first, so there is no reason for Apple to come to a settlement with them.
The best Apple can probably do here is continue to keep Fortnite off iOS so that no matter what happens, at least Epic will not be around to enjoy the fruits of any labour it does reap. As for the rest, well, if it’s one thing I have come to realise, it’s that we humans are pretty short-sighted when it comes to predicting unforeseen consequences (and I don’t just mean Apple).
Or do you think Apple will just sit idly by, watch their IAP profits plunge, and do absolutely nothing to make up for the shortfall in other areas? I am not worried about IAP revenue going away for Apple. I am more intrigued by what will succeed it, and I suspect it won’t be pretty.
You do understand that Tim Sweeney has kind of won don’t you because he wanted kicked off the iOS App StoreAs I said earlier, Epic’s endgame is to be able to get their own game store onto iOS where they can keep 100% of IAP revenue, as well as host other developers’ apps and charge them a cut.
In this regard, there is no deal or compromise that would have made both parties happy. Not forgetting that Epic violated the App Store rules first, so there is no reason for Apple to come to a settlement with them.
The best Apple can probably do here is continue to keep Fortnite off iOS so that no matter what happens, at least Epic will not be around to enjoy the fruits of any labour it does reap. As for the rest, well, if it’s one thing I have come to realise, it’s that we humans are pretty short-sighted when it comes to predicting unforeseen consequences (and I don’t just mean Apple).
Or do you think Apple will just sit idly by, watch their IAP profits plunge, and do absolutely nothing to make up for the shortfall in other areas? I am not worried about IAP revenue going away for Apple. I am more intrigued by what will succeed it, and I suspect it won’t be pretty.
Because due to Apple having to put a payment link & not allowed to take a commission in apps then according to reports Fortnite is heading back to the App Store
Did you expect Apple to just close one eye back then when Epic blatantly flouted the App Store rules?
I have heard no report of Apple planning to allow Fortnite back in the App Store, nor does Apple appear to be under any pressure to (feel free to share a link that proves me wrong). Maybe Apple loses, but that doesn't mean Epic wins either, and I will take some grim satisfaction in that.
Some people choose to be unhappy and I suspect Sweeny and Epic have chosen so.
They wanted to be kicked off of the App Store so they could pretend to have a crusade just like the stunts they pulled when the court proceedings began.
They're going to try to put Fortnite back on the App Store however I'm sure there's an entire team at Apple looking in to how to keep it out while there's an entire team at Epic scrutinizing Apple's every word and action salivating for another lawsuit.
Previously Netflix couldn’t put a link in the app. One just knew to go to Netflix.com. That’s what the judges’ ruling is about.
I suspect they won’t be freeloading after the appeal process. As long as there is an iOS app and a dev monetizes themselves from that iOS app, Apple will get a cut. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but this litigation will be settled in apples favor.
Only 7% of Fortnite customers played it on iOSDid you expect Apple to just close one eye back then when Epic blatantly flouted the App Store rules?
I have heard no report of Apple planning to allow Fortnite back in the App Store, nor does Apple appear to be under any pressure to (feel free to share a link that proves me wrong). Maybe Apple loses, but that doesn't mean Epic wins either, and I will take some grim satisfaction in that.
However Tim Sweeney has managed to get links put into iOS apps to then bypass Apple’s 30% cut for every developer going forward so that means that eventually Apple will start to lose that profit
The minute app developers put links in their apps & highlight it’s cheaper than using IAP
In regards to Fortnite then according to reports they are in the process of submitting it & if it’s not accepted by following all Apple’s terms then he’s going to take it further
Ok what are they going to say it’s not fair because developers like Spotify are not using our IAP method so because of that we deserve a cut because we are not forcing them to use that option.
Even if every developer was required to use IAP it wouldn’t make a difference because if they are allowed to put a payment link in there app they will make it cheaper than IAP purchase because they are not required to pay Apple any commission because the transaction is getting made on the internet & not in the app