Minnesota and Arizona Bills Aim to Let Developers Skirt Apple's In-App Purchase Rules

[Abazigal]

And this is why regulation is required to ensure Apples terms are fair towards the other businesses on the store.

Not everyone can get a sweetheart deal like Amazon.

Correct me if I am wrong, but antitrust law in the US hinges on whether harm has been done to the consumer, no?

Because if so, I am not seeing what leg developers have to stand on, when they are by definition not Apple’s customers in this regard, and thus would be covered under existing antitrust legislation.

Which is why I say that consumers should absolutely get to have a say in all this. If we want to keep the garden walled, then that is our choice too.

 

[Rob_2811]

No, the largest customers should be able to get deals and you declined to answer my question above about it inside just downvoted it, which only goes to prove that is reality in business.

I downvoted it without reponding becuase it was a ridiculous argument. Buy a brand new iPhone and try jailbreaking it, good luck with that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but antitrust law in the US hinges on whether harm has been done to the consumer, no?

Because if so, I am not seeing what leg developers have to stand on, when they are by definition not Apple’s customers in this regard, and thus would be covered under existing antitrust legislation.

Which is why I say that consumers should absolutely get to have a say in all this. If we want to keep the garden walled, then that is our choice too.

Great, Apple should just sell iPhones in America then.

 

[I7guy]

I downvoted it without reponding becuase it was a ridiculous argument. Buy a brand new iPhone and try jailbreaking it, good luck with that.

People do and MacRumors reports on the latest of jailbreaks on the news feed. The point was it's your device you can do what you want with it. But if you want to use an iphone with Apple's vision it comes a closed ecosystem, which to date hasn't been deemed illegal.

Great, Apple should just sell iPhones in America then.

That's a ridiculous argument as you just said.

 

[Rob_2811]

That's a ridiculous argument as you just said.

No it isn't because Abazigals argument ignores the fact that new antitrust law is being proposed to govern digital platforms and that Apple operate outside the US and US antitrust law will give them no protection outside of the US.

The app store is also being investigated in Europe which is a bigger market that the US and they take a very different view on Antitrust.

 

[AdonisSMU]

It really seems like the wind is turning against closed ecosystems. Apple especially is facing legislation like this in multiple countries and states and the EPIC lawsuit which is essentially about the same thing.

I'm starting to wonder if the days of them controlling the only gateway onto the iPhone is coming to an end.

Tbqh, they don’t need it any more. The end user will prefer the App Store for security purposes etc. so while you may have a diff app stores they’ll likely be subject to the same rules.

You know Apple is going to say can’t help your phone out if you have those other App stores on your device.

 

[DelayedGratificationGene]

Everyone here needs to email the sponsors of these bills and ask them to please stop this nonsense. Please stop hindering Apple security. Please stop meddling with the most popular product in history. I already sent mine.

 

[Quu]

Tbqh, they don’t need it any more. The end user will prefer the App Store for security purposes etc. so while you may have a diff app stores they’ll likely be subject to the same rules.

You know Apple is going to say can’t help your phone out if you have those other App stores on your device.

I think users will install other App Stores if they're able to. Valve for instance would certainly release a Steam app that sells games directly where they keep the 30% that Apple currently gets. People install Steam already on PC's etc

And there is always the possibility for viral apps to arrive that have to be sideloaded or obtained from a third party app store. As much as I don't like Fortnite it's extremely popular and would likely get people installing EPIC's game store to get it just like they already do on Android.

 

[JMAndiSmith]

No but did you pay Microsoft or Apple when you used your Mac or PC to shop on amazon? No? Why not?

Because it is an operating system. Just like iOS and iPadOS.

Apple should have the right to police their own App Store, even to the extent they do today...as long as users can choose to "shop" in other App Store if those rules become too draconian. People should own the devices they purchase, not corporations.

This is misleading or not full understood by yourself. I signed up for Netflix on my iPhone Safari. I did not pay Apple directly or indirectly. Therefore, it is possible to go on your Apple iPhone Safari and get apps and in-app purchases without using Apple App Store in-app purchase system. However, Apple can refuse to sell a product that encourages people to bypass Apple POP through the App Store.

 

[I7guy]

No it isn't because Abazigals argument ignores the fact that new antitrust law is being proposed to govern digital platforms and that Apple operate outside the US and US antitrust law will give them no protection outside of the US.

The app store is also being investigated in Europe which is a bigger market that the US and they take a very different view on Antitrust.

Proposed is not the same as passed and what is proposed may not be what is passed. Similar to the entire tax case in Ireland that is dragging on for years now, nobody knows when this will end and how it will end.

I agree change is inevitable. Although I guarantee when change happens not 100% of the people who are routing for this type of change will be satisfied as to what was changed. Maybe not even 50%.

 

[amartinez1660]

I would really like to see Apple stoping iDevices in Minnesota and Arizona from using the AppStore completely if this passes; or are they also going to make it a law that Apple must do business in Minnesota and Arizona…?

What Apple could maybe do in the name of being fair, said self-serviced-purchases App can’t be on the AppStore as a free version at the same time.
Also said app that doesn’t want to pay fees shouldn’t be allowed to use the provided libraries like MapKit, the non open source parts of Swift/SwiftUI, UIKit, etc etc etc freely, either develop their own or pay licenses (like in the “old days” basically).

Epic and Amazon do something similar on this regard actually, if you use their engines Unreal or Lumberyard and also develop for their own stores you get perks like fee discounts, free access to multiplayer testing grounds and others (last time I checked).

 

[chucker23n1]

Can you point to any business in the world where the largest of the large customers of a company don’t get special treatment in the form of rates, or other characteristics? I’ll wait while e you dig out an (meaningful) example.

Now if there were exceptions galore your list would have done teeth.

But then why make the “level playing field” argument? Cook was either uninformed or dishonest.

 

[AndiG]

Yes Apple, enter the competition. As a user I want to use Apples InApp payment cause it is convenient and safe. As a developer I don‘t want to use it - cause it is super expensive.

what about the costs? Apple certainly has some costs to carry like hosting and distributing the apps or the push Notification Center. But just make the costs transparent, offer an all in one all Apple version of the developer account and another version.
Offset something that includes hosting of 1-3 apps, first 10.000 Pushnotifications a month are free. AWS is offering such price models if you want to enter the cloud. Pay per service and amount of traffic - maybe Apple will end up making more money than before?

 

[jonblatho]

I created a shortcut to be able to quickly view my subscriptions via Siri, but that’s more for my own cheap thrill.

I personally don’t feel it’s any better to mange an app’s subscription directly via said app, because it assumes the user is able to recall every single subscription he has. It makes more sense to have all my subscriptions consolidated in one page, and my guess is that most people aren’t actively monitoring their subscriptions on daily basis the same way they monitor stock prices (since most subs are either monthly or yearly basis), so there is no need to dedicate a standalone tab to it.

As it stands, it’s 3 taps (App Store->purchases->subscriptions), which does not strike me as poor UI.

Again, the existing methods don’t have to go away.

 

[I7guy]

But then why make the “level playing field” argument? Cook was either uninformed or dishonest.

Because things are never binary in life. Privacy isn't binary, security isn't binary. Amazon is in another category who is in the stratosphere and should get special treatment. But because for the one company that may get special treatment out of millions of other apps, doesn't negate Cook's statement. To me saying that type of statement is an internet talking point.

 

[Ethosik]

How do y’all feel about right to repair? Is it acceptable, in your view, for a manufacturer to require that only OEM replacement parts installed by a company resource will function? Because, after all, you didn’t have to buy the device.

Or do you think the owner of the device should be allowed to take the risk of non-OEM parts and service?

There is a limit on this kind of thing. I can't buy a Dell desktop, replace every component, and if it breaks want to cash in on my warranty. Sometimes they want you to put the OEM parts back in to see if it resolves the issue.

 

[Ethosik]

The key difference between Xbox/Playstation and iOS/Android, as someone has alluded to above, is that smartphones in the developed world are close to being a utility. Playstation and Xbox are entertainment platforms.

Nobody is being penalised for being successful either, Apple can sell all the phones it wants, have all the services it wants as long as they are not abusing their position to neuter the competition. Same with Google.

Smartphones are in now way a utility or even a necessity. What IS a necessity is a cell phone. You are more than welcome to get a standard flip phone like the Jitter bug. iPhone and Android are nice to haves but not a utility or a necessity.

 

[Ethosik]

Why would they? If the app store offers so many benefits?

So they aren't required to tell us what they are tracking.

 

[gregmancuso]

I don’t know why I keep having to say this, but it’s obscure in that it “may not be common knowledge.” It’s not immediately obvious, and the immediately obvious path is to go to the app where you started the subscription. It shouldn’t take “a couple minutes” or any “logic.” If your UI requires thought from the user, reconsider your UI.

Yes, you can link to the account subscriptions page from an app — using a URL that can change at Apple’s whim (and has changed before), which can then render said link useless. The page you see when opening that link lists all active subscriptions, including those unrelated to the referring app. It’s an unnecessary added step, and the sluggish, non-native UI of the Subscriptions screen is a pain within itself. (It’s better than it used to be, but still awful.)

Here is my groundbreaking UI concept:

1. Open the app where the subscription was started.
2. Open the app’s settings.
3. At the top, there is a “Cancel Subscription” button. A user wishing to cancel their subscription can press that.
4. The user would then have an opportunity to either confirm or cancel the cancellation with a message indicating the date their subscription is active through.
5. There is no step 5.

You do realize that your step 3 could just as easily be a link to the Settings location. Just as there isa common way to pay for stuff, there is a common way to cancel stuff.

And, remember my edit where I admitted I completely forgot about search for "Subscription" - that is even quicker.

Your groundbreaking UI may be all well and good by your app design philosophy, but subscriptions are not not managed by the apps. The subscription is "purchased" via IAP. But, it is managed by Apple - there is no action taken by the apps to manage, renew, or recurrently bill for the subscription. Since that is all managed by apple does it not make sense for the cancel to also be managed by Apple?

 

[gregmancuso]

I don’t know why I keep having to say this, but it’s obscure in that it “may not be common knowledge.” It’s not immediately obvious, and the immediately obvious path is to go to the app where you started the subscription. It shouldn’t take “a couple minutes” or any “logic.” If your UI requires thought from the user, reconsider your UI.

Yes, you can link to the account subscriptions page from an app — using a URL that can change at Apple’s whim (and has changed before), which can then render said link useless. The page you see when opening that link lists all active subscriptions, including those unrelated to the referring app. It’s an unnecessary added step, and the sluggish, non-native UI of the Subscriptions screen is a pain within itself. (It’s better than it used to be, but still awful.)

Here is my groundbreaking UI concept:

1. Open the app where the subscription was started.
2. Open the app’s settings.
3. At the top, there is a “Cancel Subscription” button. A user wishing to cancel their subscription can press that.
4. The user would then have an opportunity to either confirm or cancel the cancellation with a message indicating the date their subscription is active through.
5. There is no step 5.

You do realize that your step 3 could just as easily be a link to the Settings location. Just as there isa common way to pay for stuff, there is a common way to cancel stuff.

And, remember my edit where I admitted I completely forgot about search for "Subscription" - that is even quicker.

Your groundbreaking UI may be all well and good by your app design , but subscriptions are not not managed by the apps. The subscription is "purchased" via IAP. But, it is managed by Apple - there is no action taken by the apps to manage, renew, or recurrently bill for the subscription. Since that is all managed by apple does it not make sense for the cancel to also be managed by Apple?

The Subscriptions pane is Settings is non-standard? It is a ListView with a select option that opens a sheet wit hate available subscription periods offered and a button to cancel? Seems pretty intuitive and consistent for all apps. Oh, and the URL has not changed since iOS 8.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

You can choose to live in a neighborhood with CC&Rs that prevent your neighbors from painting their homes plaid or parking cars w/ no tires on the lawns. You own your home, but you agree to the rules that come along with living there.

Don't like that? There are plenty of neighborhoods that don't have or enforce CC&Rs.

Choice. Choice. Choice.

Ultimately you don’t own a home. You build equity with a home as a temporary asset.

You rent the land and when you refuse to pay that tax you will lose that home even if you pay off its mortgage. Your choice is to add a mortgage onto the home to free up some equity or sell the home, downsize into something else if you can’t pay the taxes or have your property seized until you pay your obligations. In the end, you either pass on that responsibility to someone else by selling it or bequeathed to someone else after you die, or cash out. The other is the property gets permanently seized and it returns to the city, county or other government institution and they assign it to be brought up to minimum code and put back on the market or repurpose the property for some other result.

 

[chucker23n1]

Smartphones are in now way a utility or even a necessity. What IS a necessity is a cell phone. You are more than welcome to get a standard flip phone like the Jitter bug. iPhone and Android are nice to haves but not a utility or a necessity.

I know time flies, but this isn’t 2003.

 

[jinnj]

As a developer considering working on a subscription app, I strongly believe that a user should be able to cancel their subscription in as few clicks/taps as possible, in the most discoverable place possible, no questions asked (other than a confirmation).

It’s my opinion that the median user would first think to undo something they did (like start a subscription) in an app by opening that app. That’s especially true now that IAP is branded as Apple Pay in the sheet that’s presented when you’re asked to buy something. But right now, Apple doesn’t allow that, instead forcing many (most?) users to Google “how to cancel subscription iphone” and similar queries before they find out that they have to open either the App Store or Settings to cancel a subscription that they started in a specific app. Then it becomes “oh, I’ll just do it tomorrow,” and then it rebills, rinse, repeat.

Since Apple’s taking a cut, Apple makes it easy to start giving them money and difficult to stop. That’s sleazy.

Edit: Speaking of which, why do you think Apple waited until a PR firestorm erupted to start cracking down on apps that charge $9.99 a week for a simple PDF scanner feature or some nonsense like that? I thought they thoroughly review apps in the App Store.

Or something.

As a iOS developer, I can easily provide button that will direct the user to the subscription manager (1 line of code). BTW 3 clicks to get to a way to cancel subscription is the shortest way to do this. Find me an app or service that is any shorter. It literally goes from Account page > Subscription Page > Cancel.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

I've not read either bill, but difficult to see it surviving challenges based on the Commerce Clause and the dormant commerce clause.

 

[poseidondev]

As a developer I'm getting really fatigued about this nonsense. The likes of Epic have never spoken on my behalf and I'm getting tired of them, corporations like them and a handful of indie devs with a huge following and amplified voices being hailed as spokespersons "for the little man".

Let me not do the same and make it clear that I speak for no-one but myself, but I will share that I've seen similar sentiments with other indie devs. Either way, as far as I'm concerned corporations like Epic are using indie devs to further their own agenda, playing the role of some Messiah.

As someone with a background in law and who used to actively practice, this Minnesotan bill looks like it could use some more work if they want to achieve their goal. And I'm not even certain the goal is attainable to begin with. There are so many ways this can be circumvented by Apple and struck down at a federal level, depending on what the bill will look like in the end, assuming it's possible at all.

It is cute to see that they've carved out exceptions for stuff like the Xbox/PS store, a cynic might venture a guess as to who is behind all this and the likely suspect would be the ones that were behind the failed ND bill.

This section does not apply to a special-purpose digital application distribution platform.

"Special-purpose digital application distribution platform" means a digital distribution platform for single or specialized categories of applications, software, and services provided to a user on hardware primarily intended for specific purposes, including a gaming console, music player, and other special-purpose devices connected to the internet.

As a iOS developer, I can easily provide button that will direct the user to the subscription manager (1 line of code). BTW 3 clicks to get to a way to cancel subscription is the shortest way to do this. Find me an app or service that is any shorter. It literally goes from Account page > Subscription Page > Cancel.

This is true. All it takes is a link to https://apps.apple.com/account/subscriptions and the rest is almost like magic.

 

[Rob_2811]

Smartphones are in now way a utility or even a necessity. What IS a necessity is a cell phone. You are more than welcome to get a standard flip phone like the Jitter bug. iPhone and Android are nice to haves but not a utility or a necessity.

Nah, sorry that isn't true in 2021.

Can't speak for the US because I haven't bothered to look but here in the UK the only flip phone the major telcos carry is is the Samsung Galaxy Flip, they don't even offer plans on anything that isn't a smartphone.