Multiple U.S. States Sue Google for Violating Antitrust Laws With Play Store Fees

[AppliedMicro]

Name a single car that has comparable performance to a Tesla Model S Plaid or a Ferrari.

Car brands aren't dominant platforms or marketplaces.

But to keep with your analogy: The Play Store and App Store are more like two dominant fro-profit (competing but also colluding) tolled road/highway networks that span the whole of the country. Which take generous 30% cuts from car manufacturer's selling prices and cars' recurring maintenance costs for the privilege of allowing cars to drive on their network.

• "As long as there's two networks, there's choice"
• "They built their networks, so they should be allowed to do and charge what they want - everything else is communism!"
• "There's other road operators. Have you heard of the one that has some roads in rural Vermont? See, that's far from a monopoly!"
• "If a car manufacturer doesn't like paying their cut to the networks (for allowing them to drive on their roads), they can always build their own road and highway network across the country")

 

[tmarsden]

Why does it have to be a “comparable app catalog?” Name a single car that has comparable performance to a Tesla Model S Plaid or a Ferrari. I guess users have no practical alternative to those cars, right?

The catalog has to be comparable because without parity it’s not a viable alternative. If an app store doesn’t offer my banking, authenticator, email, home security, file sync, travel and healthcare apps for example it’s a complete nonstarter.

It’s funny that you bring up cars because there are so many distinct manufacturers providing viable transport alternatives to Tesla’s and Ferrari’s. If you don’t want one of those two cars you mention you’re no where near being locked out of the car experience. The same can’t be said for native mobile apps.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

People don't seem to understand this. The main difference in the analogy is that the grocery store would tell the vendor they can set their own prices, but the store will get 15%-30% for each sale. You're also only allowed to use the payment methods they accept in the store. If they don't accept Apple Pay or Amex, you HAVE to use their methods, otherwise you're walking out with no groceries. Hell, even VISA, Mastercard, etc. charge fees per transaction. That's why you see some stores (usually gas stations) giving a cash discount for gas or adding a $0.35 debit or credit fee.

Wow, reality must leave you catatonic!

I worked at a grocery store where the manager went through and took down all of the vendor coupons, and vendor sale pricing. The chain said that THEY decided when the items were going to go on sale, and they were selling that product faster than they could stock it at the current price. The vendor delivery guy just shrugged and walked away after his delivery.

Stores, headquarters mind you, CHARGE for end cap placement, and also premium shelf position, and if you don't pay enough, you don't get sales, and you may even be booted entirely. It happens. Some stores only take Visa/Mastercard. Many stores have reduced their selections down, in surprisingly many goods, to only their brands. Many stores also have their own credit cards too. Corporations are trying to 'capture' as much money as they can, and are using methods that would warp the minds of people up in arms over Apple App Store, and Google Store fees and actions.

For the courts to be used as a tool to get revenge on these corporations for some perceived slight is childish, and runs contrary to the whole idea of Capitalism. Activists/extremists/luddites seem to want to be able to dictate how corporations run their businesses, and all I can say is if these ridiculous cases are successful, just watch out... It's going to get more petty, more dictatorial, more absurd...

 

[Analog Kid]

I would be stupid to think that I'm not replaceable, and that I will last forever. 🤣
Everybody is replaceable, even Steve Jobs & Co.!

It's just a matter of...
How to replace me...
How long it will take to replace me...
Will it cost more to replace me...
What are the side effects of replacing me, if there are any...
etc.

I already denied many jobs, of course these companies found somebody stupid enough to will their gaps.
That's called competition!

No, this is not competition. The Apple, Samsung, and Amazon app stores are competition. This is government intervention.

The question isn’t whether you’d be ok not taking a job because your employer chose to hire someone else, the question is whether you're ok with the government stepping in to block or cap your compensation despite your previous investments in education and training and your satisfactory job performance, but simply because they feel you've become too important to your employer and for whatever reason your employer doesn't want to consider using anyone else or training someone new for your position.

 

[cmaier]

No, this is not competition. The Apple, Samsung, and Amazon app stores are competition. This is government intervention.

The question isn’t whether you’d be ok not taking a job because your employer chose to hire someone else, the question is whether you're ok with the government stepping in to block or cap your compensation despite your previous investments in education and training and your satisfactory job performance, but simply because they feel you've become too important to your employer and for whatever reason your employer doesn't want to consider using anyone else or training someone new for your position.

Boss: “you’re too good at your job. You do all the work around here. It isn’t fair that you get paid so much, because you are so important. For now on you work for free.”

 

[cmaier]

For all you “Apple is just as bad” people:

”The lawsuit alleges that Google engaged in a range of anticompetitive practices, including offering large app developers profit-sharing agreements in exchange for exclusivity, creating unnecessary hurdles for sideloading, and attempting “to buy off Samsung to limit competition from the Samsung Galaxy app store.””

Apple do all of that?

 

[jefhai]

People don't seem to understand this. The main difference in the analogy is that the grocery store would tell the vendor they can set their own prices, but the store will get 15%-30% for each sale. You're also only allowed to use the payment methods they accept in the store. If they don't accept Apple Pay or Amex, you HAVE to use their methods, otherwise you're walking out with no groceries. Hell, even VISA, Mastercard, etc. charge fees per transaction. That's why you see some stores (usually gas stations) giving a cash discount for gas or adding a $0.35 debit or credit fee.

The grocery store and Apple both tell developers they can set their own prices.. and they will take their cut, e.g. 30%… the grocery store and App Store operate the same way.. but what developers are asking for is the ability to pay for something to bypass the App Store cut… that’s like going into the grocery store and paying the food vendor and not the grocery store owner.. and basically using the grocery stores infrastructure for free

 

[jefhai]

That’s not a monopoly any more than “Big Macs are the only hamburgers available at McDonalds.” No court has every found that a company has a monopoly on its own product. These cases “exist” but that doesn’t mean they will be won.

Exactly… iOS/App Store is like Costco.. Android/Google Play is like BJs.. you buy their device and accept their terms aka your membership fee, which they clearly say they can ban you.. aka revoke your membership..
Idk what developers expect except to not pay the grocery store owner their fee and use the store owners infrastructure for free

 

[Michael Scrip]

The difference with stores and bars is there are multiple stores and bars! There is only one App Store. That is literally what makes it anticompetitive

But isn't there competition within the store?

You develop a calendar app. You are competing with all the other calendar apps in the store.

You don't like the 30% fee? Guess what... all the other calendar apps pay the same fee!

Still don't like it? Don't be a developer!


But let's be honest here... what would having multiple stores actually do?

Let's imagine a scenario where Apple allows multiple app stores. You might find a store that only has a 20% fee. So you put your calendar app there.

But you're still gonna keep your calendar app on Apple's App Store, right? That's where the bulk of iOS users are. It would be crazy to remove your app from the official Apple App Store.

So now you've got to maintain two accounts on two app stores... and provide updates to two different app stores. Or three. Or four. Seems like a lot of extra hassle that might not actually be beneficial to the developer in the long run.

I understand your argument... one store is "anticompetitive"

But... is having multiple stores really the solution to the problem?


Ironically... I'm commenting on a thread about Google's platform... which does allow multiple app stores.

And yet... hardly any developers put their Android apps in stores other than the official Google Play Store.

I think that's the answer to my previous question...

 

[TheMacDaddy1]

“It’s Apple’s platform, they can do what they want” I hear people say constantly. That would be true if Apple kept the iPhone as it originally was - a completely closed platform only capable of running first-party apps. The moment they opened the platform up to developers to compete on they created a marketplace and have to abide by all the rules and regulations that govern a marketplace.

Imagine if Walmart imposed rules on Gillette that said, in order for Gillette to sell its razors at Walmart, they had to follow specific rules. Gillette is not allowed to offer their razors or refill cartridges at a lower price at any other store, including their own. They’re not allowed to advertise that you can buy replacement razor cartridges anywhere besides Walmart. And Walmart will sell its own brand of razors and place them in more prominent locations in the store. Sure I could go to Target but Walmart is closer and more convenient and this unfairness that occurs in the background isn’t readily apparent to me as a consumer.

The app store itself is less of an issue as is the draconian rules Apple imposes on developers to participate in the store, alongside the deeper level of integration it gives its own services that aren’t available to similar third-party offerings.

It’s not about security, Apple can mandate strict signing for any app installed on iOS similar to macOS.

It’s not about convenience with in-app payment. Apple can mandate that developers offer Apple Pay as a payment option (which apple does *not* take 30% out of) and have consistent dispute/refund rules.

Using your analogy "Gillette", in comparison to Apple, they could offer their razors at a lower cost directly from their company. You pay nothing for Netflix, which is a free App. Apple gets none of that cut. You can use Safari on the same device to setup your account and pay for it there....again Apple gets nothing. Same for the Kindle books I buy but read on my iPad.

What marketplace rules are you talking about? Have you ever worked in the retail industry? How about in grocery? The stuff that goes on in the retail market industry makes that stuff look like a joke.

This is about companies vs developers. User do NOT care. They care about things like having to manage their information on 20 different app stores. They care about their privacy.

If Apple or Google go too far the developers will walk. Same for the users. I wont use any Google products save for YouTube (no other option) because Google goes too far with their information collection and search manipulation.

Let the free market correct greedy mistakes by these companies or developers. The government needs to look into data collection and privacy issues more than how much Google or Apple give to developers.

 

[AppliedMicro]

the grocery store and App Store operate the same way.. but what developers are asking for is the ability to pay for something to bypass the App Store cut… that’s like going into the grocery store and paying the food vendor and not the grocery store owner.. and basically using the grocery stores infrastructure for free

Do they operate the same way?

I think the comparison begins to fail with in-app purchases and subscriptions.

Take Netflix: once their app has been downloaded to a customer's device, are Netflix using Apple's infrastructure in providing video streaming to that device? Hardly. They do their own in-house production, have their own media deals, use their own content delivery networks. The whole service is basically provided from Netflix directly to the customer's device, without using Apple's infrastructure

Take a ****** MMORPG game downloadable from the App Store: Does its developer or publisher use Apple's infrastructure to deliver the virtual add-ons, gold coins, in-game weapons and equipment that I've purchased as an in-game purchase? No they don't. Well, maybe they do - only forced their in-app purchase system on developers and consumers and don't allow a choice of payment method. But everything else is handled in-app or on the developer's game servers.

In that sense, Apple isn't a grocery store. Aren't they, with their app store, rather operating a business fair or trade show, merely introducing exhibitors/suppliers and buyers/customers to each other?

Similarly, they're charging an amount for a place on their premises. And I wouldn't be surprised if they take a cut of on-premises transactions/purchases.

Enforcing in-app purchasing is rather similar saying: "I'll take a cut out of every transaction you're ever going to make with that customer you acquired on our show - forever."

Let's say I go and visit that business fair and encounter an apple farmer that let's me taste one apple from his latest harvest. And it's like the best, most delicious Apple I've ever tasted. I instantly buy a basket of them. Why shouldn't the fair organiser take a cut?

Now, the basket full of Apples will eventually run out, and ask the farmer: "Can you deliver more apples to my straight to my door later?" and we agree on subsequent deliveries directly from the farmer to my door. Should the fair organiser force us to use their own payment system and take a generous cut of any future such purchases?

Why not? Well, surely neither do I have to visit that particular fair to taste and buy agricultural product nor does the producer have to offer there.

But then, how many suitable (and relevant) such marketplaces are there for business introduction that we could go to?

How many grocery stores are there, what's the competition between grocery stores like?
Seems pretty intense to me. How does that compare to mobile app marketplaces?

 

[I7guy]

[...]
My god, how did people EVER get along before Apple started playing gatekeeper, holding their hands, and tucking them in at night?

You mean since 2007....14 years ago?

 

[Analog Kid]

attempting “to buy off Samsung to limit competition from the Samsung Galaxy app store.”

Hm. That’s not going to play well in court…. Attempted anti-trust isn’t really a thing though, is it?

 

[jefhai]

Do they operate the same way?

I think the comparison begins to fail with in-app purchases and subscriptions.

Take Netflix: once their app has been downloaded to a customer's device, are Netflix using Apple's infrastructure in providing video streaming to that device? Hardly. They do their own in-house production, have their own media deals, use their own content delivery networks. The whole service is basically provided from Netflix directly to the customer's device, without using Apple's infrastructure

Take a ****** MMORPG game downloadable from the App Store: Does its developer or publisher use Apple's infrastructure to deliver the virtual add-ons, gold coins, in-game weapons and equipment that I've purchased as an in-game purchase? No they don't. Well, maybe they do - only forced their in-app purchase system on developers and consumers and don't allow a choice of payment method. But everything else is handled in-app or on the developer's game servers.

In that sense, Apple isn't a grocery store. Aren't they, with their app store, rather operating a business fair or trade show, merely introducing exhibitors/suppliers and buyers/customers to each other?

Similarly, they're charging an amount for a place on their premises. And I wouldn't be surprised if they take a cut of on-premises transactions/purchases.

Enforcing in-app purchasing is rather similar saying: "I'll take a cut out of every transaction you're ever going to make with that customer you acquired on our show - forever."

Let's say I go and visit that business fair and encounter an apple farmer that let's me taste one apple from his latest harvest. And it's like the best, most delicious Apple I've ever tasted. I instantly buy a basket of them. Why shouldn't the fair organiser take a cut?

Now, the basket full of Apples will eventually run out, and ask the farmer: "Can you deliver more apples to my straight to my door later?" and we agree on subsequent deliveries directly from the farmer to my door. Should the fair organiser force us to use their own payment system and take a generous cut of any future such purchases?

Also...

How many grocery stores are there, what's the competition between grocery stores like?
Seems pretty intense to me. How does that compare to mobile app marketplaces?

I get your point. And I’m sorry that you wrote it and I didn’t have in my post Apple is like Costco.. a membership grocery store.. buying the device and accepting the EULA is the cost of admission to use the device. In that case when you use your phone you are technically still in the store.. you accepted Apples terms which is the only way you are allowed to use the phone. In that case you are still paying to use Apples Store..

An analogy is a live performance outside of a bar but you can only see them from the bars outdoor balcony if you are buying drinks.. You are still using your iPhone and all the software that makes Netflix even possible to run on the phone.. Apples software EULA is more like a membership to Costco than owning your own car..

The problem with your trade show idea is people physically leave the rules of the trade show when they are done (unless NDA)… but you don’t leave Apples iOS App Store EULA when the apps are downloaded and paid for. So in that case you are still at the trade show forever.. which seems weird cause we think we own our phones… and yes we own the hardware. But we don’t own the software… ask how the John Deere tractor folks are doing updating their software on the physical tractors they own..

You can choose to accept the EULA or not.. like others have said you don’t have to own the phone

 

[CarlJ]

It's about time IOS gets opened up, that way we can finally have true third party browsers with adding. We can have torrents and emulators and all the good stuff Android gets.

“It’s about time that we require Tesla to add a gas combustion engine to their cars so that we can all do exciting things like buying gas from gas stations just like all the other cars.”

Maybe if you want all the features of an Android phone you should just go buy an Android phone. iPhones have some fundamental differences that clearly don’t align with what you want, and do very much align with what a lot of the rest of us want.

Right now, there is a choice offered to consumers between Apple’s secure walled garden model and Android’s free-for-all model. If you force Apple to work just like Android, you will have taken that choice away from the rest of us.

 

[JJL2026]

As many have said if you want to side load apps buy Android, if you want a walled garden buy an iPhone. But the fact remains their are only two operating systems if you want iOS you’re forced to buy an iPhone. There is some competition on the hardware aspect of Android phones but still choices are limited. An antitrust inspires competition and in a competitive market innovation is a necessity because consumers now have a broader choice where to spend their money.I hope several Antitrusts are filled against big tech companies because whether you are found of iOS or you are found of Android the fact remains they hold monopolies on the tech industry. Just like how Pringles came out of the Antitrust filed against Frito Lay I know great things will come out of the Antitrust(s) filed against big tech companies.

 

[rpmurray]

But the fact remains their are only two operating systems if you want iOS your forced to buy an iPhone

#entitledpeople

 

[Analog Kid]

Do they operate the same way?

I think the comparison begins to fail with in-app purchases and subscriptions.

Take Netflix: once their app has been downloaded to a customer's device, are Netflix using Apple's infrastructure in providing video streaming to that device? Hardly. They do their own in-house production, have their own media deals, use their own content delivery networks. The whole service is basically provided from Netflix directly to the customer's device, without using Apple's infrastructure

Take a ****** MMORPG game downloadable from the App Store: Does its developer or publisher use Apple's infrastructure to deliver the virtual add-ons, gold coins, in-game weapons and equipment that I've purchased as an in-game purchase? No they don't. Well, maybe they do - only forced their in-app purchase system on developers and consumers and don't allow a choice of payment method. But everything else is handled in-app or on the developer's game servers.

In that sense, Apple isn't a grocery store. Aren't they, with their app store, rather operating a business fair or trade show, merely introducing exhibitors/suppliers and buyers/customers to each other?

Similarly, they're charging an amount for a place on their premises. And I wouldn't be surprised if they take a cut of on-premises transactions/purchases.

Enforcing in-app purchasing is rather similar saying: "I'll take a cut out of every transaction you're ever going to make with that customer you acquired on our show - forever."

Let's say I go and visit that business fair and encounter an apple farmer that let's me taste one apple from his latest harvest. And it's like the best, most delicious Apple I've ever tasted. I instantly buy a basket of them. Why shouldn't the fair organiser take a cut?

Now, the basket full of Apples will eventually run out, and ask the farmer: "Can you deliver more apples to my straight to my door later?" and we agree on subsequent deliveries directly from the farmer to my door. Should the fair organiser force us to use their own payment system and take a generous cut of any future such purchases?

Why not? Well, surely neither do I have to visit that particular fair to taste and buy agricultural product nor does the producer have to offer there.

But then, how many suitable (and relevant) such marketplaces are there for business introduction that we could go to?

How many grocery stores are there, what's the competition between grocery stores like?
Seems pretty intense to me. How does that compare to mobile app marketplaces?

A trade show or business fair is a temporary installation. I'm not sure grocery stores, or any physical presence, is an ideal analogy, but grocery stores are a better match here than a farmers market. The App Store is a store for apps, not a developer directory.

I have yet to find a grocery store that will sell me a direct to farm subscription service for tomatoes. Surely I can find a farm that will ship to me directly, maybe even more cheaply than the grocery will sell to me, but I don't expect my grocery to take themselves out of the transaction.

I don't have a subscription to Stastica, so can't see the data you linked to, but in my neighborhood, there's one grocery in walking distance and a couple of convenience stores, and maybe 2 companies in driving range (there's multiple outlets of those two companies). That's no more competition for my grocery dollar than Google, Apple, Samsung and Amazon provide in the app market.

 

[Analog Kid]

Just like how Pringles came out of the Antitrust filed against Frito Lay I know great things will come out of the Antitrust(s) filed against big tech companies.

Is this the argument you're going with here? After all the cost and chaos of a decade long antitrust war, we're hoping for Pringles to happen?

 

[One2Grift]

The grocery store and Apple both tell developers they can set their own prices.. and they will take their cut, e.g. 30%… the grocery store and App Store operate the same way.. but what developers are asking for is the ability to pay for something to bypass the App Store cut… that’s like going into the grocery store and paying the food vendor and not the grocery store owner.. and basically using the grocery stores infrastructure for free

Well stated.
The hysterical crowd argument seems to believe the grocery store is a monopoly in its own grocery store, and that must be stopped by government action.

 

[Michael Scrip]

The grocery store and Apple both tell developers they can set their own prices... and they will take their cut, e.g. 30%... the grocery store and App Store operate the same way... but what developers are asking for is the ability to pay for something to bypass the App Store cut... that’s like going into the grocery store and paying the food vendor and not the grocery store owner... and basically using the grocery stores infrastructure for free.

Sticking with the grocery store analogy... what is a typical grocery store cut?

I realize most physical stores operate on a wholesale/markup model... but let's spitball anyway.

If an app in the App Store has a price of $10... we know the developer gets $7 after Apple takes their $3 cut.

But if product on the shelf at a grocery store has a price of $10... how much does the maker of that product get in the end? And how much does the store get for providing the infrastructure?

I think we can all agree that stores should get something for providing the service. I guess the question is... how much is too much?

 

[cmaier]

I think we can all agree that stores should get something for providing the service. I guess the question is... how much is too much?

Why is that a question? Since when do we get to decide that?

 

[Michael Scrip]

Why is that a question? Since when do we get to decide that?

Lol you're right... we didn't decide that. Apple created the 70/30 split.

And developers loved the idea in 2008. It was so much better than the "old" way of selling software.

But fast forward to 2021... and people are losing their everloving minds about having to give 30% to app stores.

So that's why I asked... is 30% too much? Clearly there is a problem with that now. Holy crap... I've lost count of how many lawsuits and investigations there are. And the subsequent articles on fine sites like MacRumors.

Other questions to ask... what is the percentage that developers will be happy with... and to prevent government interference?

Can Apple fix this themselves and repair their relationship with developers?

Or will Apple be "trust-busted" into oblivion?

 

[jefhai]

Sticking with the grocery store analogy... what is a typical grocery store cut?

I realize most physical stores operate on a wholesale/markup model... but let's spitball anyway.

If an app in the App Store has a price of $10... we know the developer gets $7 after Apple takes their $3 cut.

But if product on the shelf at a grocery store has a price of $10... how much does the maker of that product get in the end? And how much does the store get for providing the infrastructure?

I think we can all agree that stores should get something for providing the service. I guess the question is... how much is too much?

Or how much is too little. Grocery stores actually operate on a tight margin… that’s why Costco’s success depends on selling its own Kirkland brand products to increase its margins. Either way a private company is allowed to charge what it wants when it’s not a monopoly. Costco is not a monopoly.. and neither is iOS / App Store… as people have said you don’t have to buy an iPhone.. if you think a bar or restaurant sells it’s beer for too much you don’t have to buy the beer.
So the argument the store is greedy is not accurate.. you either negotiate with the store on the cut they get or you accept it.
Many products don’t negotiate because they don’t even care where they are placed in the store… but other products like beverages and cereals fight to the death for shelf locations so they pay the store a larger cut.
I think developers are just unhappy they pay a cut to Apple at all… Developers could always just increase their prices. Maybe that’s what needs to happen. Consumers need to get used to the idea that app are more intense to make and cost more, or developers need to accept the competition.
Developers seriously need to look at what it takes to move a physical product vs developing software. My feeling is a lot of developers are acting privileged… there are a lot more real life logistical jobs that are harder than software development.

I’m ranting….
Why should little indie non-game devs be able to complain… when game devs in the gaming industry have accepted terrible salaries?

 

[jefhai]

Lol you're right... we didn't decide that. Apple created the 70/30 split.

And developers loved the idea in 2008. It was so much better than the "old" way of selling software.

But fast forward to 2021... and people are losing their everloving minds about having to give 30% to app stores.

So that's why I asked... is 30% too much? Clearly there is a problem with that now. Holy crap... I've lost count of how many lawsuits and investigations there are. And the subsequent articles on fine sites like MacRumors.

Other questions to ask... what is the percentage that developers will be happy with... and to prevent government interference?

Can Apple fix this themselves and repair their relationship with developers?

Or will Apple be "trust-busted" into oblivion?

I think you will realize it’s inflation that hasn’t reached the App Store… Apps and in-app purchases should just clearly cost more… Sure there will be backlash… but it’s a deeper problem then a 30% cut issue.. Software /services should cost more.. look at video games going up to $70/game..
Inflation hits, prices rice and consumers should have for higher salaries