4 ms·

The pro-Apple argument centers on “you got what you signed up for, what’s the problem?” Arguments about uniform treatment don’t play much part. The anti-Apple a

The pro-Apple argument centers on “you got what you signed up for, what’s the problem?” Arguments about uniform treatment don’t play much part. The anti-Apple argument (at least the one that matters) is that Apple has hurt consumers in some way. Whether Apple has made life difficult for developers is pretty much irrelevant.

gamblor956 6y ago
Given that developers have to pay Apple for access to the app store, they are also consumers, just in a different way.
- akiselev 6y ago
  I don't think that's how most business relationships work. When I buy a high end sintering 3d printer, for instance, it doesn't come with a mountain of consumer protections because it's assumed that if I'm buying one, I know what I'm doing and will make sure the purchase contract contains warranty clauses, support, and so on. The cheap FDM 3d printer I bought off of Amazon, however, is targeted at Joe Public and thus treated differently by the law with a mandated one year warranty. I'm not sure what the legal test is for differentiating the two, but the difference is definitely recognized by the courts. IANAL but it's unlikely that the courts would decide that app developers are consumers in the classical sense. That said, it doesn't matter (again, IANAL). Consumers are still being harmed, as Apple so graciously showed by removing Epic from the store - removing consumer choice in a free market is anti-competitive.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    Being a business doesn't render one a non-consumer, otherwise, no business would ever have recourse against another business for non-negotiated transactions. A consumer is simply a purchaser that "consumes" a product or service rather than using it for production (of their own goods or services) or reselling it.
    - akiselev 6y ago
      That assumes that antitrust regulations and the FTC use the common English definition of "consumer". I couldn't find the definition they use with a cursory search but I assume it's a more precise definition related to the definition of "consumer product" (IANAL, assume I'm wrong)
      - gamblor956 6y ago
        Antitrust regulations don't make a distinction between consumers and businesses. What matters is how certain market actions interfere with the function or operation of the market. Usually, antitrust actions don't even involve consumer harm--they involve harm to competitors. Consumer products are products consumed by an end user not in the course of their business, simply meaning that the product is not resold or otherwise materially used in the production of the consumer's own products. Thus, for example, your work office is a consumer of staples, but Staples would not be (because they are in the business of (re)selling office supplies, even though they also consume them).

gamblor956 6y ago

Given that developers have to pay Apple for access to the app store, they are also consumers, just in a different way.

akiselev 6y ago
I don't think that's how most business relationships work. When I buy a high end sintering 3d printer, for instance, it doesn't come with a mountain of consumer protections because it's assumed that if I'm buying one, I know what I'm doing and will make sure the purchase contract contains warranty clauses, support, and so on. The cheap FDM 3d printer I bought off of Amazon, however, is targeted at Joe Public and thus treated differently by the law with a mandated one year warranty. I'm not sure what the legal test is for differentiating the two, but the difference is definitely recognized by the courts. IANAL but it's unlikely that the courts would decide that app developers are consumers in the classical sense. That said, it doesn't matter (again, IANAL). Consumers are still being harmed, as Apple so graciously showed by removing Epic from the store - removing consumer choice in a free market is anti-competitive.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  Being a business doesn't render one a non-consumer, otherwise, no business would ever have recourse against another business for non-negotiated transactions. A consumer is simply a purchaser that "consumes" a product or service rather than using it for production (of their own goods or services) or reselling it.
  - akiselev 6y ago
    That assumes that antitrust regulations and the FTC use the common English definition of "consumer". I couldn't find the definition they use with a cursory search but I assume it's a more precise definition related to the definition of "consumer product" (IANAL, assume I'm wrong)
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      Antitrust regulations don't make a distinction between consumers and businesses. What matters is how certain market actions interfere with the function or operation of the market. Usually, antitrust actions don't even involve consumer harm--they involve harm to competitors. Consumer products are products consumed by an end user not in the course of their business, simply meaning that the product is not resold or otherwise materially used in the production of the consumer's own products. Thus, for example, your work office is a consumer of staples, but Staples would not be (because they are in the business of (re)selling office supplies, even though they also consume them).