Paddle Plans to Launch Alternative In-App Purchase System on iOS That Circumvents Apple's Fees

[theotherphil]

Define “unlock extra functionality in the app”.

What if the app doesn’t have “extra” functionalities, and features are presented to “relevant user groups,” which are managed externally?

How about you have a read of the developer agreements? They’re pretty comprehensive and capture all your “what ifs?”. Apple has thought of everything to ensure that developers don’t skirt the rules and if they do, they will be suspended/ banned.

https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/apple-developer-program/Apple-Developer-Program-License-Agreement-20210607-English.pdf

https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/schedules/Schedule-2-and-3-20210607-English.pdf

In agreeing to the developer agreement, you authorise Apple to act as your agent to market and host your Licensed and Custom Applications. The only method of enabling any extra functionality within the app is via IAP. You must submit to Apple for review, all content, functionality or services that are to be unlocked and their prices. The IAP API will then be used to unlock that functionality - and can be directly used for auditing purposes…no need to request anything from a developer after the fact. Any extra functionality becomes part of the Licensed Application and as such, Apple can charge commissions. The judge has ruled this to not be an anti-trust violation and as such, can continue. A developer can take payment elsewhere, but the content will still need to use the IAP API to unlock that functionality. Apple already knows the cost because the developer is required to submit that to Apple prior to offering the extra functionality. Therefore, the only difference to developers is that they will receive an invoice for commissions from Apple at the end of the month instead of the balance of in app payments. There is no requirement on Apple to reduce the commission rate for those developers who use their own payment processors, although they may choose to drop it by whatever it costs them. Given the size of Apple, I’d suggest that they get better deals from Visa than a small developer would therefore the costs would likely still be higher than choosing Apple to handle everything.


A quick, non-exhaustive list of some relevant points:

“Licensed Application” shall include any content, functionality, extensions, stickers, or services offered in the software application.

“Licensed Application” means an Application that (a) meets and complies with all of the Documentation and Program Requirements, and (b) has been selected and digitally signed by Apple for distribution, and includes any additional permitted functionality, content or services provided by You from within an Application using the In-App Purchase API.

“In-App Purchase API” means the Documented API that enables additional content, functionality or services to be delivered or made available for use within an Application with or without an additional fee.

3.3.3 Without Apple’s prior written approval or as permitted under Section 3.3.25 (In-App Purchase API), an Application may not provide, unlock or enable additional features or functionality through distribution mechanisms other than the App Store, Custom App Distribution or TestFlight.

1. Use of the In-App Purchase API
1.1 You may use the In-App Purchase API only to enable end-users to access or receive content, functionality, or services that You make available for use within Your Application (e.g., digital books, additional game levels, access to a turn-by-turn map service). You may not use the In-App Purchase API to offer goods or services to be used outside of Your Application.
1.2 You must submit to Apple for review and approval all content, functionality, or services that You plan to provide through the use of the In-App Purchase API in accordance with these terms and the processes set forth in Section 6 (Application Submission and Selection) of the Agreement. For all submissions, You must provide the name, text description, price, unique identifier number, and other information that Apple reasonably requests (collectively, the “Submission Description”). Apple reserves the right to review the actual content, functionality or service that has been described in the Submission Descriptions at any time, including, but not limited to, in the submission process and after approval of the Submission Description by Apple.
If You would like to provide additional content, functionality or services through the In-App Purchase API that are not described in Your Submission Description, then You must first submit a new or updated Submission Description for review and approval by Apple prior to making such items available through the use of the In-App Purchase API. Apple reserves the right to withdraw its approval of content, functionality, or services previously approved, and You agree to stop making any such content, functionality, or services available for use within Your Application.
1.3 All content, functionality, and services offered through the In-App Purchase API are subject to the Program Requirements for Applications, and after such content, services or functionality are added to a Licensed Application, they will be deemed part of the Licensed Application and will be subject to all the same obligations and requirements. For clarity, Applications that provide keyboard extension functionality may not use the In-App Purchase API within the keyboard extension itself; however, they may continue to use the In-App Purchase API in separate areas of the Application.

 

[seeker_sleeper]

And honestly, considering many smalll developers and medium size developers that are solely iOS/iPad OS only apps/teams (such as Things!) I think many will stick with Apple considering the huge success and future potentials (just like the past) they've enjoyed.

Many games such as what EPIC and EA Games makes that are multi-platform may have a better play at outside app purchase and reputable customer service for such purchases/deliveries/support and refunds. Not to mention not heavily mining out customer data.

Warning to IOS users:
Do NOT use your banking cards or primary Visa-Debit cards or credit cards. Use a pre-paid credit card and load ONLY the limit for the purchase or recurring subscription fee for what you require/purchase outside of Apple's in-app-purchase system. Don't give a cookie monster unlimited cookies with milk.

We only use Apple Card these days. It’s not the best benefits but appreciate the privacy features.

 

[MacBH928]

"In addition to lower fees, Paddle said benefits of its payment system will include access to customer data"

And there's the privacy Apple warned about. Imagine Visa giving your address to all the shops you buy from.

what privacy? Apple is scanning your photos via CSAM

 

[0924487]

How about you have a read of the developer agreements? They’re pretty comprehensive and capture all your “what ifs?”. Apple has thought of everything to ensure that developers don’t skirt the rules and if they do, they will be suspended/ banned.

https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/apple-developer-program/Apple-Developer-Program-License-Agreement-20210607-English.pdf

https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/schedules/Schedule-2-and-3-20210607-English.pdf

In agreeing to the developer agreement, you authorise Apple to act as your agent to market and host your Licensed and Custom Applications. The only method of enabling any extra functionality within the app is via IAP. You must submit to Apple for review, all content, functionality or services that are to be unlocked and their prices. The IAP API will then be used to unlock that functionality - and can be directly used for auditing purposes…no need to request anything from a developer after the fact. Any extra functionality becomes part of the Licensed Application and as such, Apple can charge commissions. The judge has ruled this to not be an anti-trust violation and as such, can continue. A developer can take payment elsewhere, but the content will still need to use the IAP API to unlock that functionality. Apple already knows the cost because the developer is required to submit that to Apple prior to offering the extra functionality. Therefore, the only difference to developers is that they will receive an invoice for commissions from Apple at the end of the month instead of the balance of in app payments. There is no requirement on Apple to reduce the commission rate for those developers who use their own payment processors, although they may choose to drop it by whatever it costs them. Given the size of Apple, I’d suggest that they get better deals from Visa than a small developer would therefore the costs would likely still be higher than choosing Apple to handle everything.


A quick, non-exhaustive list of some relevant points:

“Licensed Application” shall include any content, functionality, extensions, stickers, or services offered in the software application.

“Licensed Application” means an Application that (a) meets and complies with all of the Documentation and Program Requirements, and (b) has been selected and digitally signed by Apple for distribution, and includes any additional permitted functionality, content or services provided by You from within an Application using the In-App Purchase API.

“In-App Purchase API” means the Documented API that enables additional content, functionality or services to be delivered or made available for use within an Application with or without an additional fee.

3.3.3 Without Apple’s prior written approval or as permitted under Section 3.3.25 (In-App Purchase API), an Application may not provide, unlock or enable additional features or functionality through distribution mechanisms other than the App Store, Custom App Distribution or TestFlight.

1. Use of the In-App Purchase API
1.1 You may use the In-App Purchase API only to enable end-users to access or receive content, functionality, or services that You make available for use within Your Application (e.g., digital books, additional game levels, access to a turn-by-turn map service). You may not use the In-App Purchase API to offer goods or services to be used outside of Your Application.
1.2 You must submit to Apple for review and approval all content, functionality, or services that You plan to provide through the use of the In-App Purchase API in accordance with these terms and the processes set forth in Section 6 (Application Submission and Selection) of the Agreement. For all submissions, You must provide the name, text description, price, unique identifier number, and other information that Apple reasonably requests (collectively, the “Submission Description”). Apple reserves the right to review the actual content, functionality or service that has been described in the Submission Descriptions at any time, including, but not limited to, in the submission process and after approval of the Submission Description by Apple.
If You would like to provide additional content, functionality or services through the In-App Purchase API that are not described in Your Submission Description, then You must first submit a new or updated Submission Description for review and approval by Apple prior to making such items available through the use of the In-App Purchase API. Apple reserves the right to withdraw its approval of content, functionality, or services previously approved, and You agree to stop making any such content, functionality, or services available for use within Your Application.
1.3 All content, functionality, and services offered through the In-App Purchase API are subject to the Program Requirements for Applications, and after such content, services or functionality are added to a Licensed Application, they will be deemed part of the Licensed Application and will be subject to all the same obligations and requirements. For clarity, Applications that provide keyboard extension functionality may not use the In-App Purchase API within the keyboard extension itself; however, they may continue to use the In-App Purchase API in separate areas of the Application.

You skillfully dodged my point.

Define “unlock extra functionality in the app”.

What if the app doesn’t have “extra” functionalities, and features are presented to “relevant user groups,” which are managed externally?

What‘s the difference between giving users a new blue checkmark vs a new hat for the character? No extra functionality has been unlocked, only information that’s relevant to the user has been added.

Same with a new number that represents the users account information.

 

[DeepIn2U]

You skillfully dodged my point.

Define “unlock extra functionality in the app”.

What if the app doesn’t have “extra” functionalities, and features are presented to “relevant user groups,” which are managed externally?

What‘s the difference between giving users a new blue checkmark vs a new hat for the character? No extra functionality has been unlocked, only information that’s relevant to the user has been added.

Same with a new number that represents the users account information.

Um what do you mean by “features are presented to “relevant user groups,”??

Is changing the colour or suit of a character ‘really meaningful’ to the user (such as games)? Maybe to youth - I recall watching my son early morning playing San Andreas customizing a playable character for 30mins to just run I boots, yellow Speedo’s and a motorcycle helmet. I was seriously took him THAT long? Does the player do anything different?
nope.
does the play get stronger faster better weapons!
Nope.
Is the play different at all in the game?
Nope.
how long did other online playing with him comment on the look?
10mins.

kids don’t realize wasted time configuring adds no real value and 10mins in the shock/awe/fun is gone. Epic has done an amazing job catering to youth today with continual visual upgrades to game characters in Fortnite (wow iOS auto-corrected that properly from my mispelling. Weird). This is why they’re so hooked like social media or addicts on street hard drugs. The next fix is the next character look mod. Stop the mods the kids suffer withdrawal or look for a substitute.

doesn’t really add value. When they get smart enough to realize that treasure is gone forever. The peddles will continue to tighten that grip.
Yes maybe different than your pint or focus but I honed in trying to understand that one section.

 

[DeepIn2U]

Apple could have large developers sign revised contracts that stipulate they owe Apple 30% of in-app purchases that take place outside of Apple payment, then verify this via regular audits. They would largely be self-selecting depending on whether they are enrolled in Apple’s small developer programme or not (ie: whether you earn over 1 million a year or less).

My guess is that Apple may not bother to stipulate the same terms to small developers, both because the extra effort would be worth the revenue and to avoid over-burdening them.

It’s far from ideal and results in more work for everyone, but by specifically not going after smaller developers, it would solve the issue of optics. There is a lot less sympathy for a company like Spotify or Epic.

This could lead to a handful of large development company’s (Adobe as an example) pulling their software from App Store and allow for creative savvy hungry small individual developers create savvy or even better cheaper replacements that sell exponentially better (poor example gimp on Linux suffices better than ms paint although every download listing says it’s like photoshop).

if this occurs heavily and considerably the App Store will return to its roots were anybody can make a decent living or a fortune with their skills and creativity. That was the original promise of the App Store.

could be scary for some but only cause most are used to this. Though it maybe great for everyone. We’ll see how it plays out.

 

[SanderEvers]

They will share your e-mail and personal information with the developer. And this is why, from day one, I've been on Apple's side with this story. And will 100% refuse to use any app that forces non-Apple iAP purchases. Or any non-Apple App Stores on my iDevices. They will get € 0,00 from me.

I might go into sideloading, but I already CAN since I'm an App developer. (of free apps without any iAPP purchases)

 

[0924487]

They will share your e-mail and personal information with the developer. And this is why, from day one, I've been on Apple's side with this story. And will 100% refuse to use any app that forces non-Apple iAP purchases. Or any non-Apple App Stores on my iDevices. They will get € 0,00 from me.

I might go into sideloading, but I already CAN since I'm an App developer. (of free apps without any iAPP purchases)

You mean AltStore with developer account?

 

[0924487]

Hey everyone, Christian founder of Paddle here.

Appreciate the lively debate surrounding our announcement today! Spotted a few things that I wanted to give some clarity on.

Paddle has been a great supporter of Mac apps for many years, powering payments for apps you know and love like CleanMyMac, Framer, Tower and more.

When it comes to your customer data, we take the responsibility of keeping it safe and secure extremely seriously. We believe that you should have access to that data, just like you would if the purchase is made on your website – something Apple currently doesn’t give you. It’s our view that app developers should be able to interact with their customers directly rather than having to go through Apple or another 3rd party.

Any use of customer data for marketing communication will require the customer to opt-in through a checkbox in the checkout process - we’re just giving developers the ability to actually make that request in-app.

Paddle exists to make it easier for developers to sell their software (without handing over a third of their revenue to the likes of Apple) and turn their products into sustainable businesses. Part of that mission is to offer smooth and secure experiences for consumers – which is why we review all products thoroughly and have a large 24/7 support team to help customers resolve questions or issues with their payments.

We’ll be working on our in-app offering ahead of the December launch (and beyond) and welcome any feedback and concerns.

I think most Apple users, pro or against Epic, would agree that they don’t want email, phone number, address, zip code, cc numbers, etc to be leaked to all developers. If the third party system doesn’t have the likes of private relay, tokenized transactions that hide the identity of the customers from the developers, it’s gonna be a hard sell.

We also don’t want spam emails, and mailchimp harassment.

 

[EddieKeyton1]

I wouldn’t use any other iap even if apple DID allow it. I don’t want my user information thrown around. That’s the whole reason apple doesn’t allow it. For our privacy. I’m guessing that there are some people who may enjoy it though. But not me.

This doesn’t help us at all. But devs need love too.

 

[SanderEvers]

You mean AltStore with developer account?

Nope, just a normal developer account. Which allows you to sign and sideload any ipa you can get the source code of. Just build it with XCode and publish to your device. (You'll need a paid Apple developer license (99/year) to do this)

 

[0924487]

Nope, just a normal developer account. Which allows you to sign and sideload any ipa you can get the source code of. Just build it with XCode and publish to your device. (You'll need a paid Apple developer license (99/year) to do this)

Does it expire in 7 days, and limit to 10 App IDs?

What if you don’t have the source code, only the compiled IPA?

 

[I7guy]

Good luck paddle. Apple is appealing and let’s see where it goes. According to the ruling though you are still in the hook for commission.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Good luck paddle. Apple is appealing and let’s see where it goes. According to the ruling though you are still in the hook for commission.

Good luck apple, EU will force side loading instead so we can just install cydia or alt lstore instead of using stupid loopholes

 

[GermanSuplex]

People saying this will help developers and hurt users, you are wrong. This will hurt both developers and users. Apple will get their money one way or the other, and if they can't get it from the developers who are actually making money from in-app purchases, they'll start charging way more for all developer accounts including those who don't make any money from their apps.

Thats a really good point.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

People saying this will help developers and hurt users, you are wrong. This will hurt both developers and users. Apple will get their money one way or the other, and if they can't get it from the developers who are actually making money from in-app purchases, they'll start charging way more for all developer accounts including those who don't make any money from their apps.

If apple did that google would suck up every developer to their side instead. It’s for some reason you people want apple to suck every penny they can

Thats a really good point.

It’s actually a bad point.

 

[I7guy]

If apple did that google would suck up every developer to their side instead. It’s for some reason you people want apple to suck every penny they can

You people? Who are "you people?" It's that the universe of people who believe that companies should be able to charge and collect for their services. Or are "you people" the universe of apple supporters who don't believe that Apple should just give away the app store because it now belongs to the people?

It’s actually a bad point.

It's a good point.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

You people? Who are "you people?" It's that the universe of people who believe that companies should be able to charge and collect for their services. Or are "you people" the universe of apple supporters who don't believe that Apple should just give away the app store because it now belongs to the people?

You understand things don’t need to be binary right?
Companies are free to collect for their services, they aren’t free to do as they wish as governments regulate the market as they should.

 

[I7guy]

You understand things don’t need to be binary right?

Some things are binary, many aren't. When it comes to how a business legally operates, I have a binary opinion.

Companies are free to collect for their services, they aren’t free to do as they wish as governments regulate the market as they should.

If governments regulate the market; after the fact. That type of regulation is going to be what will drive the EU to be second class technological citizens. Who will want to see in the EU if in the future they decide to take away the revenue stream?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Some things are binary, many aren't. When it comes to how a business legally operates, I have a binary opinion.

Well we are lucky it doesn’t work like that.

If governments regulate the market; after the fact. That type of regulation is going to be what will drive the EU to be second class technological citizens. Who will want to see in the EU if in the future they decide to take away the revenue stream?

Apple gives close to zero revenue to EU. Why do you think they are trying to implement a global minimum tax rate?
If apple leaves EU they wouldn’ care at all as there are competitors ready to take apples 400 million user market and 60 billion US dollar revenue

 

[I7guy]

Well we are lucky it doesn’t work like that.

That’s lucky?

Apple gives close to zero revenue to EU. Why do you think they are trying to implement a global minimum tax rate?

I don’t care how much the EU gets in tax revenue. I’m talking about outside investments in technology.

If apple leaves EU they wouldn’ care at all as there are competitors ready to take apples 400 million user market and 60 billion US dollar revenue

Or it may not work the way you think. Anyway let me know when things change.

 

[GermanSuplex]

If apple did that google would suck up every developer to their side instead. It’s for some reason you people want apple to suck every penny they can

It’s actually a bad point.

It’s simple - do you think Apple will continue to host apps and all that jazz for free if others are siphoning cash and privacy data from their users? It’s not simply about profits either. I like the unified look and feel of iOS that’s made possible by the standards and rules Apple has in place.

At the end of the day, I’m ok with changes being made, but only if they are well thought-out, planned and fair to everyone involved. And it’s clear many in Congress - on both sides of the aisle - aren’t really sure what to do with anything in the digital social and market places. Many agree something needs done, but the “whats” are all over the place.

Apple was near defeat 20 years ago, and it shouldn’t be punished for the popularity of its innovation.

 

[Abazigal]

If apple did that google would suck up every developer to their side instead. It’s for some reason you people want apple to suck every penny they can

70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

That’s lucky?

Yes because the business world is not binary. If it was we would be royally screwed. If apple can bend the knee to Chinese censors I think they can give people some freedoms.

I don’t care how much the EU gets in tax revenue. I’m talking about outside investments in technology.

Okey. Apple gives close to zero investment compared to other companies

Or it may not work the way you think. Anyway let me know when things change.

We all know apple are to greedy to exit the market.

It’s simple - do you think Apple will continue to host apps and all that jazz for free if others are siphoning cash and privacy data from their users? It’s not simply about profits either. I like the unified look and feel of iOS that’s made possible by the standards and rules Apple has in place.

I don’t care if apple hosts thing for free. They should have thought about that before being so greedy and provided developers the ability to use cheap payment options.
The App Store is made to sell iOS devices, if they believe it’s to make money, then the world have something else to say about that

Apple was near defeat 20 years ago, and it shouldn’t be punished for the popularity of its innovation.

Yes they should be punished if they misuse this fortune to quell any competition. If apple can complain that Qualcomm have too high fees then developers can get lower fees

70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

Indeed so apple will get back in line or GTFO of the world market.

 

[Abazigal]

Indeed so apple will get back in line or GTFO of the world market.

I was referring to app developers abandoning the iOS app market and choosing to focus solely on android. The reason why I don’t think this will happen is because iOS is still where the money is. Hence my statement, representing that app developers still earn way more on iOS compared to android, even if app developers had to pay Apple 30% and Google nothing.