3 ms·

It is very difficult to prosecute though, because convergence is something that happens without collusion. You need to have a smoking gun to convict a group of

It is very difficult to prosecute though, because convergence is something that happens without collusion. You need to have a smoking gun to convict a group of companies under anti-collusion laws. Case in point, the 30% fee for digital stores existed before both Apple’s and Google’s stores.

paulryanrogers 6y ago
30% on specialized game consoles, yes. On general purpose computers digital distribution was diversified among many websites. (At least apart from games or before Steam.) IOS and Android are increasingly marketed as general purpose devices which are needed for more and more parts of life.
- kergonath 6y ago
  You said exactly the same thing as I did. When the App Store started, the model was device-specific stores or Steam, all of them taking 30%. It was entirely unremarkable. Now, is there a law saying that you are allowed to take a cut only on non-general purpose computers? Where is the line between specific- and general-purpose? Is it defined anywhere? Why would app stores selling games be meaningfully different? Is a feature phone “general purpose”? At which point did smartphones become “general purpose”? Since when the character of a device is determined by marketing (other than for the purposes of fake advertising)? Have you got any concrete examples of phones being marketed explicitly as “general-purpose computing devices” anyway? Until there is a definite answer to these questions, the argument boils down to “I don’t like it” or “I feel it should be different”. It might make you feel good, but that point of view is unlikely to be shared with courts.
  - paulryanrogers 6y ago
    I'm not trying to make a legal argument. Just pointing out that before the IOS store and Steam it was common to buy from producers directly or from a variety of digital markets. Which could undermine the premise that a 30% cut was typical.
TheCoelacanth 6y ago
Convergence vs collusion is a distinction without a difference when the prices are public. Any market dominated by only a few participants where none of the participants is willing to compete on price needs government intervention.

paulryanrogers 6y ago

30% on specialized game consoles, yes. On general purpose computers digital distribution was diversified among many websites. (At least apart from games or before Steam.) IOS and Android are increasingly marketed as general purpose devices which are needed for more and more parts of life.

kergonath 6y ago
You said exactly the same thing as I did. When the App Store started, the model was device-specific stores or Steam, all of them taking 30%. It was entirely unremarkable. Now, is there a law saying that you are allowed to take a cut only on non-general purpose computers? Where is the line between specific- and general-purpose? Is it defined anywhere? Why would app stores selling games be meaningfully different? Is a feature phone “general purpose”? At which point did smartphones become “general purpose”? Since when the character of a device is determined by marketing (other than for the purposes of fake advertising)? Have you got any concrete examples of phones being marketed explicitly as “general-purpose computing devices” anyway? Until there is a definite answer to these questions, the argument boils down to “I don’t like it” or “I feel it should be different”. It might make you feel good, but that point of view is unlikely to be shared with courts.
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  I'm not trying to make a legal argument. Just pointing out that before the IOS store and Steam it was common to buy from producers directly or from a variety of digital markets. Which could undermine the premise that a 30% cut was typical.

TheCoelacanth 6y ago

Convergence vs collusion is a distinction without a difference when the prices are public. Any market dominated by only a few participants where none of the participants is willing to compete on price needs government intervention.