Epic Games Setting Up Webshops for iOS Developers to Offer Users Out-of-App Purchases

[I7guy]

I think it comes down to context
Can my 90 plus year old gran get away with not having one absolutely
However in modern society you pretty much require one
That’s why they are getting regulated differently by governments & courts

Yes, most people require a cellular phone or modem. Depends <> regulate. I depend on a bunch of things in modern society but other than health, safety and security aspects these things that are manufactured by for profit consumer oriented corporations should not be over-regulated

 

[I7guy]

I’m not talking about leaked info on credit cards
I’m talking about if the transaction is made on epic’s website then who is responsible for the sale & the refund because then that’s who is entitled to the commission then

Well that’s something to be worked out. Correct?

What do you mean the EU is turning Apple into a public utility do people not depend on their phones these days for most things?

Depends is a subjective term. If the cellular network is not enabled and no WiFi your “smartphone” is a brick.

Hence why it’s getting treated differently to other consumer products these days

No that’s not the reason. The DMA was not about apples wrongdoing. The injunction against Apple in the US was about apple dragging their feet on a court order.

 

[AppliedMicro]

The injunction against Apple in the US was about apple dragging their feet on a court order.

It wasn't about them "dragging their feet".
It was for defying the order by way of deliberate malicious compliance.

 

[Stuwil]

Well that’s something to be worked out. Correct?

Depends is a subjective term. If the cellular network is not enabled and no WiFi your “smartphone” is a brick.

No that’s not the reason. The DMA was not about apples wrongdoing. The injunction against Apple in the US was about apple dragging their feet on a court order.

If getting treated differently because it’s seen as essential in this day & age if you actually want to do things in society these days

That’s like saying if my house had no roof I would get wet?

It’s not about Apple’s wrongdoing regarding the DMA or payment links in apps
It’s about how the smartphone is viewed against other things in society.

 

[surferfb]

Of course.

Maybe. But I wouldn’t call it “very likely”. I trust the judge to deliver a ruling that is not “very likely unconstitutional”.

Ok, I’ll give you “very likely” is probably too strong, but there’s definitely a valid argument that it is unconstitutional, and given what I know the current makeup of the Supreme Court, I am not sure I’d take the bet that it is allowed.

This isn’t a “public use” case.

The judge in the case felt obligated to try to head off the argument that it

On a footnote to this sentence (which I’d say pretty clearly refutes the argument that Apple charging a commission on the links couldn’t possibly be allowed under the original order)

This Court previously recognized that…Apple could still charge a commission on developers.

Footnote:

For the same reasons, the Court disagrees that requiring Apple to set a commission of zero constitutes an unconstitutional taking …. Apple was provided with an opportunity to value that intellectual property and chose not to do so.

You’d think if it wasn’t a public use case she wouldn’t have bothered to make that argument. Or would have said “the taking clause doesn’t apply because it’s not a public use case.”

 

[redheeler]

They get a cut of everything you sell on their website.

Yes but not every purchase on an iPhone you buy on their website. So again, not the same thing...

 

[I7guy]

If getting treated differently because it’s seen as essential in this day & age if you actually want to do things in society these days

That’s like saying if my house had no roof I would get wet?

It’s not about Apple’s wrongdoing regarding the DMA or payment links in apps
It’s about how the smartphone is viewed against other things in society.

Your comments are how you view smartphones and my comments are how I view smartphones. Smartphones are a great convenience made possible by the cellular infrastructure. Convenient <> regulatory.

 

[bcortens]

Your comments are how you view smartphones and my comments are how I view smartphones. Smartphones are a great convenience made possible by the cellular infrastructure. Convenient <> regulatory.

Since you like to move it a level up, I’ll move it a level up and say cellular infrastructure is a great convenience made possible by electricity. Since there are a variety of cellular providers all with their own infrastructure if a cell phone company wishes to charge say, 30% of each iPhone sale price and another 30% on all transactions through the phone (including safari) as commission they should be within their rights to do so and no government has any interest in stopping them.

 

[I7guy]

Since you like to move it a level up, I’ll move it a level up and say cellular infrastructure is a great convenience made possible by electricity

The invention and distribution of the grid is already over a hundred years old. Without electricity we’d be in the dark ages. Without cellular technology we’d be using push button phones.

. Since there are a variety of cellular providers all with their own infrastructure if a cell phone company wishes to charge say, 30% of each iPhone sale price and another 30% on all transactions through the phone (including safari) as commission they should be within their rights to do so and no government has any interest in stopping them.

Public utilities are already regulated and they get their iap through rate hikes. And regulated industries don’t work like that. But regulation like the DMA is turning Apple into a public utility, even though they have not broken existing laws in the books relative to their iOS App Store. (Yes I know the anti steering provision, but that was California only)

 

[bcortens]

The invention and distribution of the grid is already over a hundred years old. Without electricity we’d be in the dark ages. Without cellular technology we’d be using push button phones.

So? There are multiple cellular companies, the internet (which you claim is what is essential) is available via land lines, we got by without cellular internet till the mid two-thousands. As you keep saying about the iPhone, if it went away tomorrow we would be fine.
None of what you said provides any reason why telecoms shouldn’t charge what I suggested as many of the same qualities apply to Apple's iPhone as well.

Public utilities are already regulated and they get their iap through rate hikes. And regulated industries don’t work like that. But regulation like the DMA is turning Apple into a public utility, even though they have not broken existing laws in the books relative to their iOS App Store. (Yes I know the anti steering provision, but that was California only)

Apple is trying to get a FRAND fee as I have suggested in the past, nor are you comfortable suggesting they should get a FRAND fee.

The DMA is a new set of regulations trying to adapt to a new future where digital life is more important than ever and in this world the digital realm will be regulated if it appears that the digital markets are being distorted by big companies which can use their size and power to restrict commerce.

 

[I7guy]

So? There are multiple cellular companies, the internet (which you claim is what is essential) is available via land lines, we got by without cellular internet till the mid two-thousands. As you keep saying about the iPhone, if it went away tomorrow we would be fine.
None of what you said provides any reason why telecoms shouldn’t charge what I suggested as many of the same qualities apply to Apple's iPhone as well.

Telecoms can what the want being a public utility limits what they can do. They already tax us. Unlimited, limited, throttling.

Apple is trying to get a FRAND fee as I have suggested in the past, nor are you comfortable suggesting they should get a FRAND fee.

Does Apple meet the threshold?

The DMA is a new set of regulations trying to adapt to a new future where digital life is more important than ever and in this world the digital realm will be regulated if it appears that the digital markets are being distorted by big companies which can use their size and power to restrict commerce.

The DMA is the best innovation blocking regulation to be enacted in years. Market places are optin. Use the market place that suits your business.

 

[bcortens]

Telecoms can what the want being a public utility limits what they can do. They already tax us. Unlimited, limited, throttling.

Again, how does your logic lead us to the belief that telecoms should be a public utility. After all, just like Apple, they are not truly necessary, just like Apple no telecom has a monopoly (as you define it), there are many alternatives, yet, just like Apple, they control market access. So, why should telecoms not also, like Apple, be compensated by gaining 30% of all transactions that flow across their networks?

Does Apple meet the threshold?

The DMA is the best innovation blocking regulation to be enacted in years. Market places are optin. Use the market place that suits your business.

Use the telecom that suits your business.

 

[I7guy]

Again, how does your logic lead us to the belief that telecoms should be a public utility. After all, just like Apple, they are not truly necessary, just like Apple no telecom has a monopoly (as you define it), there are many alternatives, yet, just like Apple, they control market access. So, why should telecoms not also, like Apple, be compensated by gaining 30% of all transactions that flow across their networks?

Use the telecom that suits your business.

The bottom line is the DMA is government overreach, imo. And we’ll wait to see what happens in the states. Apple will go down fighting.

The rest we’re debating opinions and hypotheticals except I hope Apple prevails.

Maybe voluntarily Apple and google can make some changes so that customers actually benefit. Not big devs.

 

[Stuwil]

Your comments are how you view smartphones and my comments are how I view smartphones. Smartphones are a great convenience made possible by the cellular infrastructure. Convenient <> regulatory.

My comments are based on things like banks consistently closing because more people are doing online banking and more things are now going that way.

That is why Apple for example is getting treated differently to other businesses in regards to regulation like payment links

 

[Alfonson]

Let’s see what happens to your share price when Apple lose their $20bn payment from Google every year, their revenue from services starts falling because of AppStore changes and customers are faced with higher prices due to tariffs.

it will not change the past and the money Apple made

 

[Stuwil]

The bottom line is the DMA is government overreach, imo. And we’ll wait to see what happens in the states. Apple will go down fighting.

The rest we’re debating opinions and hypotheticals except I hope Apple prevails.

Maybe voluntarily Apple and google can make some changes so that customers actually benefit. Not big devs.

Why don’t you think that developers offering payment links & having the ability to now offer promotions to customers on iOS
Is a good thing?

Do you not think that customers should be able to get offers on products?

 

[AppliedMicro]

Maybe voluntarily Apple and google can make some changes so that customers actually benefit

They’ve had 15+ years to do so.
They’ve done nothing that benefits customers during that time (well… at least Apple haven’t).

 

[surferfb]

They’ve had 15+ years to do so.
They’ve done nothing that benefits customers during that time (well… at least Apple haven’t).

Things Apple has done on the App Store over the past 15 years that benefit consumer/developers, just off the top of my head head:

• Privacy labels and disclosure
• App Tracking Transparency
• Lowered commission to 15% for vast majority of apps
  • Subscriptions lowered to 15% after first year
  • Small businesses
• Expedited app review requests
• Improved analytics

 

[AppliedMicro]

Lowered commission to 15% for vast majority of apps

…for a small amount of their overall revenue or consumer spending
And they only did it when legislative attempts at regulation gained tractions.

By “your” logic (i.e. detractors’ of the DMA’s logic), consumers do not benefit from lowered commissions anyway - cause “you” claim that developers are going to pocket the difference in all instances anyway.

I concede the point about privacy labels (though from what I know, they pretty much rely on self-reporting, rather than being supervised or enforced by Apple).

The elephant in the room is Apple’s maintaining their anticompetitive revenue stream, supracompetitive rates and their unfair advantages in competing with others on certain app/services (anything you can get as a subscription from Apple, basically).

 

[surferfb]

By “your” logic (i.e. detractors of the DMA’s logic), consumers do not benefit from lowered commissions anyway - cause “you” claim that developers are going to pocket the difference in all instances anyway.

I agree - I don't remember hearing anything about apps lowering prices after that went into effect (that's why I said consumers/developers).

That said, I do agree to your overall point that there haven't been a large number of changes to the App Store; I'd argue that's more of a result of being a mature offering than anticompetiveness, but just wanted to flag there haven't been zero changes.

 

[I7guy]

They’ve had 15+ years to do so.
They’ve done nothing that benefits customers during that time (well… at least Apple haven’t).

And this latest doesn’t either. And neither does the DMA.

 

[I7guy]

Why don’t you think that developers offering payment links & having the ability to now offer promotions to customers on iOS
Is a good thing?

Why do you think it’s good? Are consumers going to get lower prices? Is your credit card going to be in less places?

Do you not think that customers should be able to get offers on products?

It’s not about consumers it’s about corporate IP.

 

[I7guy]

My comments are based on things like banks consistently closing because more people are doing online banking and more things are now going that way.

That is why Apple for example is getting treated differently to other businesses in regards to regulation like payment links

Good point. I online bank from my windows desktop. Online banking has been a thing before the dawn of the smartphone.

So that’s not a reason to treat Apple differently.

 

[Stuwil]

Good point. I online bank from my windows desktop. Online banking has been a thing before the dawn of the smartphone.

So that’s not a reason to treat Apple differently.

If you are under retirement age then you need a smartphone for at least one thing in your life because that’s just how life is now

That is why Apple & google get treated differently from any other business out there that is why for example Apple are getting regulated to put payment links onto their product

 

[Stuwil]

Why do you think it’s good? Are consumers going to get lower prices? Is your credit card going to be in less places?

It’s not about consumers it’s about corporate IP.

Ok if as you say it’s about corporate IP
Then why is one company doing all they can to cling on to the 30% IAP and not allow Spotify for example to offer a promotion on iOS yet with this payment link they can now offer it to customers on the iOS app through the payment link?