UK Class Action Accuses Apple of Breaking Competition Law by Overcharging for Apps

[m4mario]

Go implement, say Adobe Photoshop or Fortnite in HTML 5 and report back. In the mean time can we have alternative app stores because I am afraid that it may take you a decade or two to do what I asked (and then this would only be possible after HTML 25 is released)

Are you going to use XCode and iOS API’s to develop these apps for the alternative App Store? You do realize these are Apple proprietary technologies given for free to developers? Therefore, even if it is available in an alternative App Store, Apple can still charge 30% for these technologies? Remember, when someone develops an app, 95% of the code is iOS internal libraries. That’s why all apps look, feel and scroll the same. To use these technologies and not pay Apple anything would be robbery.

 

[robco74]

That would kill off many smaller developers and thus innovation where they just don't have the money to invest several thousands...The MSDN model is a bit of a mess in my opinion and no where near as clear on development tools and approaches. And not least Microsoft has a nasty habit of delivering incomplete frameworks, switch and totally leave existing stuff behind.

I agree it is a model. It is not a model I'd aspire to personally.

They can't contain that. Fragmentation will kick in and the user experience will become worse for it than it is today.


In theory that is great, but in practice you surely aren't so naive to really think it would work like that. I can already see the headlines. And not only that, it wouldn't surprise me when some of the same people now lobbying for the break up of the stores will then file suites that it is all Apple's fault and they should protect us all.

People really don't seem to be able to grasp how good they have it now.

Oh, I agree that the current model is a pretty good deal, especially for smaller developers. However people seem to think that everything that is digital should be free (as in beer). In another ten year's time, people will complain that 15% is too high.

I do think that there should be a higher barrier to publish now. If your idea is great, then it should be possible to secure financial backing. The store has become crowded with a fair amount of junk apps and abandonware.

If government regulators want to force Apple and Google, and undoubtedly, MS, Sony, and Nintendo at some point, to allow alternate stores, then they have a duty to provide some sort of liability shield. This could be in the form of regulation that provides protections for privacy, and for situations such as when a child runs up a huge amount on a freemium game. Currently Apple provides some buffer between the customer and the developer. If governments decide to take that away, then governments should enact some basic consumer protections at minimum. Alas, few who are technically proficient seek government office, so regulations are often ham-handed and/or contain plenty of loopholes. Technology often moves quickly, while legislative and regulatory bodies often do not.

 

[falainber]

Are you going to use XCode and iOS API’s to develop these apps for the alternative App Store? You do realize these are Apple proprietary technologies given for free to developers? Therefore, even if it is available in an alternative App Store, Apple can still charge 30% for these technologies? Remember, when someone develops an app, 95% of the code is iOS internal libraries. That’s why all apps look, feel and scroll the same. To use these technologies and not pay Apple anything would be robbery.

Apple is going to provide these libraries for free. All OS vendors do. Otherwise iOS will be useless. It would be as good as the first iPhone - without any (but preinstalled) apps. Would you prefer iPhone without any apps or, say, Samsung phone with Android with millions of apps? I think the answer is obvious. So Apple is not going to do what you say they would.

 

[1258186]

Please do educate me, with a trustworthy source, on where that 78% profit margin comes from.

I came from documents released as part of the Apple vrs Epic trial.

 

[1258186]

Your security would not be compromised. I take it you are above the average compared to most unassuming users, so you would know trustworthy app stores to install apps from.

The beauty of iOS is in its walled garden. Even the less-than-average user doesn't have to be mindful of where they get their apps from. Apple as a gatekeeper upholds at least some standard for the apps. "App store X" might have entirely different standards for usability, stability & security – or no standards at all.

A jungle, as I said in my previous comment, to the very potential detriment of user-experience, quality and security.

AppStore, 30% cut, over a billion users. Where's the problem? Breaking it and paving way for unforeseen problems is stupid for everyone, devs and users alike.

Still today "power users" can jailbreak their phones and go on an expedition into the jungle. So I wonder if Apple introducing a less restricted (less walled) Power User Mode would alleviate some of the controversy? Power User Mode would of course come with a disclaimer that after enabling it, you are no longer eligible for Apple Support. Why should Apple support something they have not vetted, approved and distributed?

Which, again, brings me to the jungle – from the user's point of view. Wanna do what you want? Choose Android. As we all know, it's already what a lot of people love

iOS is an alternative choice. It's good to have choice. Ironically, many people here wanting more choice are advocating for removing the choice that iOS offers.

You didn’t answer my central point. Why is it ok to download apps from alternative sources on the Mac but not the iPhone and iPad? I’ve not heard a single argument to convince me that this is anything more than smoke and mirrors from Apple in a desperate attempt to maintain their lucrative iOS AppStore monopoly. Enough is enough. It’s time for the lawmakers to force change and allow competition.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Do you have the stats on how many devs reduced the price of their apps when their commission rates went to the SB tier pricing?

Again, irrelevant. To prove that the aforementioned commission rate has no effect on the end price of a digital service you would need to know that there are no instances where the same service is being offered elsewhere at a different price. That is the price would be the same or higher on all other platforms (Apple actually tried to put that in to policy back in 2011, glad it did not would be an immediate lawsuit probably). But the fact is that there are price differences between in-app-purchase and out-app-purchases as of course there are distinct distribution costs to be taken into account.

If the 30% was such a good and fair deal for everyone as you paint it to be, for sure both Netflix, Spotify, Kindle and many others would offer in-app-purchase options. It would not make any business sense not to. Yet the fact is many can distribute and reach their customers at a lower cost using other services than they can through the App Store. Yet, they need to be on the App Store has it is the only way their customers have to install and update their apps.

Do you think the say Spotify does not want adhere to in-app-purchase because it is at a great price? Or is it because they feel the price is way over what app installation and updates facilities is worth?

 

[Ubuntu]

Computers are not phones 👏👏👏

Phones contain a lot of sensitive real time data including location and your money 👏👏👏

If your phone turns into a flea market crooks buying your data will track you and rob you 👏👏👏

Or kidnap your family 🤮🤮🤮

Especially if you live in a dangerous place 💥💥💥

Think carefully before you talk rubbish otherwise one day these criminals and dictators will come for you and your family 🩸 🩸 🩸

Are you OK? You missed the point, but that's alright.

 

[Ubuntu]

Possibly from some peoples perspective. For example it could be argued that by having it locked down it provides a capability to ensure quality control, and for example verify the impact on battery life. The reputational damage a popular application coded in the wrong way can have on the hardware provided can be severe. Removing such controls from Apple would provide a risk to the entirety of the platform with no clear finger to point or person to blame.

I think it being locked down does help ensure quality control but a lot of that is down to iOS. The App Store certainly helps, but there's still a lot of crap there as we've seen recently. I can see your point for sure though. I'm not sure if there's much more to say but it's been a good discussion.

 

[1258186]

Some people recognise quality and are happy to pay more for more. It doesn't always have to be a race to the bottom.

And no matter how often you people say this, it isn't a tax. It is simply a cost of doing business and very well worth it to get access to a captive qualified audience of customers. Entirely normally for anyone who actually works in any kind of commercial setting.

The moment it is no longer commercial viable nor makes any business sense then developers/publisher will stop using the system and go somewhere else or do something else. As such change is inherent to the model it uses.


Possibly from some peoples perspective. For example it could be argued that by having it locked down it provides a capability to ensure quality control, and for example verify the impact on battery life. The reputational damage a popular application coded in the wrong way can have on the hardware provided can be severe. Removing such controls from Apple would provide a risk to the entirety of the platform with no clear finger to point or person to blame.

Is the iOS platform really that fragile? I thought iOS was originally based on Mac OS which apparently doesn’t need the same lockdown.

 

[I7guy]

What we know is that there are businesses offering a reduced price out side the App Store, same app, same digital service. Both in Mac App Store and iOS.

Believe me that it does not have much todo with Devs trying to make the App Store look. It just that app installation and updates (distribution) are cheaper.

Are there stats? Saying there is at least one business offering a reduced price is not helpful (because the rational might not be the ios app store commissions, it could be desperation for customers). The Mac app store is a different business model, as we know.

 

[deevey]

Wow. Is a 30% sales commission really considered an “unlawfully excessive amount of profit” in the UK? What is a lawful amount of profit?

And how exactly did Apple overcharge? Doesn’t the developer set the price?

Sounds like a lawyer that just wants publicity, at any cost.

At a guess the Law Firm, wants 33% of the class action (which, is also an industry standard)

 

[scuac]

"unlawfully excessive levels of profit,"

This is both the funniest and most worrying thing I read today. I was not aware that success was a punishable offense in the UK.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Is the iOS platform really that fragile? I thought iOS was originally based on Mac OS which apparently doesn’t need the same lockdown.

Lol and so we go in circles. A phone and connection to phone network payment systems etc is a very different device that requires different treatment. Heck I bought a brand new car (BMW M2 Competition) for my wife just tapping my phone without needing to add a pin. And then use that same device to check into aeroplanes, proof my remain to leave in the country with border force and so on. You can’t do any of such things without the trusted system that is there.

Could I see a possibility to do that whilst allowing other stores. Yes I could but at a cost of even further lockdown in certain areas.

it will end up fragmented and a very bad user experience.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

"unlawfully excessive levels of profit,"

This is both the funniest and most worrying thing I read today. I was not aware that success was a punishable offense in the UK.

Hey If that Corbin idiot got into power than it would be a reality. Now it’s luckily the opinion of one woman.

 

[1258186]

Lol and so we go in circles. A phone and connection to phone network payment systems etc is a very different device that requires different treatment. Heck I bought a brand new car (BMW M2 Competition) for my wife just tapping my phone without needing to add a pin. And then use that same device to check into aeroplanes, proof my remain to leave in the country with border force and so on. You can’t do any of such things without the trusted system that is there.

Could I see a possibility to do that whilst allowing other stores. Yes I could but at a cost of even further lockdown in certain areas.

it will end up fragmented and a very bad user experience.

Funny, I‘ve purchased far more stuff using my Mac than my iPhone. Never been scammed once. How strange is that. Nobody will convince me that this isn’t one big lie to protect their iOS Appstore monopoly.

 

[1258186]

Wow. Is a 30% sales commission really considered an “unlawfully excessive amount of profit” in the UK? What is a lawful amount of profit?

And how exactly did Apple overcharge? Doesn’t the developer set the price?

Sounds like a lawyer that just wants publicity, at any cost.

Apple’s profit margin on iOS AppStores sales is 78%. You are confusing commission fees with profits.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Funny, I‘ve purchased far more stuff using my Mac than my iPhone. Never been scammed once. How strange is that. Nobody will convince me that this isn’t one big lie to protect their iOS Appstore monopoly.

I call bs. There is no way you carry you MacBook into a shop and use it to pay contactless as the pdq machine. Or at say an airport shuttle to pay for the fare. Or use the build in nfc technology to read your passport to proof citizenship. And so on.

 

[ani4ani]

Embarrassed I live in the UK with this one.

You should be posting irrational posts like this

 

[ani4ani]

I’m puzzled by the reporting here. I’m fairly sure the UK doesn’t have class action lawsuits, and instead has Group Litigation Orders which are opt-in, not opt-out. Perhaps an expert can explain.

Collective redress and Group Litigation Orders

The UK does not have a system of American-style ‘opt out’ class actions, securities claims are generally managed through Group Litigation Orders (“GLOs”)

www.stewartslaw.com

It doesn’t

Nevertheless find it amusing watching the comments...funny when the UK stopped the Epic case, most were waxing lyrical about the uk

Apple’s solution to this is easy. Reduce the fee and raise hardware costs.

Well they have been doing the latter with earnest for years

 

[ani4ani]

Well I guess if the government doesn't have much of a case for anti-trust and monopolistic behavior, they'll authorize a class action lawsuit for price fixing and racketeering.

This has absolutely zero to do with government

 

[ani4ani]

"unlawfully excessive levels of profit,"

This is both the funniest and most worrying thing I read today. I was not aware that success was a punishable offense in the UK.

It isn’t...but monopolistic profiteering and not paying corporate taxes is a punishable offence.

 

[I7guy]

This has absolutely zero to do with government

So the legal system, which is part of the government, didn't authorize the class action lawsuit?

 

[ani4ani]

So the legal system, which is part of the government, didn't authorize the class action lawsuit?

The legal system is independent of government. Parliament creates the law, not government and so subsequently no it didn’t...and there is no such thing as a class action in UK law.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

Apple’s profit margin on iOS AppStores sales is 78%. You are confusing commission fees with profits.

Where do you get 78%? Is the complaint referring to gross profit or net profit being “unlawful”? Is there a UK law that prohibits a certain level of profit (either gross or net)?

 

[m4mario]

Apple is going to provide these libraries for free. All OS vendors do. Otherwise iOS will be useless. It would be as good as the first iPhone - without any (but preinstalled) apps. Would you prefer iPhone without any apps or, say, Samsung phone with Android with millions of apps? I think the answer is obvious. So Apple is not going to do what you say they would.

Microsoft visual studio professional costs over $1000 per developer, per year. And Google collects user data through android and uses it for advertising purposes to offset the costs for it’s developer tools.
Apple neither charges developers money for the development tools it provides. Nor does it collect user data. If you bypass the App Store, how do you think Apple should be compensated for all the work it’s done with the developer tools?

Also, If your theory is true that developers will not develop for the platform if the API’s are not provided for free, then there should not be any apps in the App Store now as Apple already charged 30%.

This judgement is basically theft of Apple’s technologies. The people who came up with this did not understand how different platforms make money differently.