4 ms·

Regardless of the behavior of selecting "Epic direct payment," this is a flagrant violation of App Store rules. I agree, it seems sensical to allow an app to m

Regardless of the behavior of selecting "Epic direct payment," this is a flagrant violation of App Store rules. I agree, it seems sensical to allow an app to mention that buying direct from their website might be cheaper than going through in-app purchases. It might even be reasonable to open that link automatically. I do think that it's reasonable to restrict third party payment processors, though. It's inconvenient, dangerous, and provides little in the way of antifraud measures if you're dealing with every app's purchase processor (assuming they don't all just use Stripe). I actually think Apple's, "only our payment system can be used," system is reasonable. The percentage is maybe steep and would be better served by a progressive scale. But I also don't think Apple should be able to prevent an app from advertising their own payment system out of the app.

monocasa 5y ago
> Regardless of the behavior of selecting "Epic direct payment," this is a flagrant violation of App Store rules. Yep, because they needed to flagrantly violate the rules if they thought the rules were not something that would stand up to legal scrutiny. The US court systems (particularly on the civil side) try not to rule on hypotheticals. They want to be discussing actual damages. Because of that, flagrantly violating the app store rules (to then get taken off the store) is the first step towards getting a judge to rule on if they were legal in the first place.
salamandersauce 5y ago
But they already allow third party payment processors in physical goods retail apps e.g the Amazon app for example (and many other much smaller retailers). Is fraud a much bigger concern in digital only apps? Why should I trust a small retailer with an app over a big development house like EA?
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  The fraud aspect is either a mistake or there are people intentionally promoting a particular agenda. As you rightfully pointed out, online payments have been done for decades outside of the App Store and fraud has never been a dealbreaker (turns out banks and card networks give you a lot of recourse against it even for debit cards).
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
>this is a flagrant violation of App Store rules. Rules that many believe are unjust, hence this making it to court. >I do think that it's reasonable to restrict third party payment processors, though. It's inconvenient Paying for goods has never been easier especially with all the payment app integrations like paypal, cash app, venmo, etc. I want choice and I want Apple to compete by being a better product not by being the only game in town. If Apple opened up they would gain me as a customer.
Nextgrid 5y ago
> It's inconvenient, dangerous, and provides little in the way of antifraud measures The major card networks have rules that give customers recourse in case of fraud or missing/faulty goods regardless of the processor and card type. Some countries have laws that strengthen these protections even more, though it's usually limited to credit cards. The "antifraud" narrative about how the App Store is so much better at fraud protection is annoying (especially considering how many scam apps there are).
jussij 5y ago
> I actually think Apple's, "only our payment system can be used," system is reasonable. .... But I also don't think Apple should be able to prevent an app from advertising their own payment system out of the app. Aren't those two positions mutually exclusive? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

monocasa 5y ago

> Regardless of the behavior of selecting "Epic direct payment," this is a flagrant violation of App Store rules. Yep, because they needed to flagrantly violate the rules if they thought the rules were not something that would stand up to legal scrutiny. The US court systems (particularly on the civil side) try not to rule on hypotheticals. They want to be discussing actual damages. Because of that, flagrantly violating the app store rules (to then get taken off the store) is the first step towards getting a judge to rule on if they were legal in the first place.

salamandersauce 5y ago

But they already allow third party payment processors in physical goods retail apps e.g the Amazon app for example (and many other much smaller retailers). Is fraud a much bigger concern in digital only apps? Why should I trust a small retailer with an app over a big development house like EA?

Nextgrid 5y ago
The fraud aspect is either a mistake or there are people intentionally promoting a particular agenda. As you rightfully pointed out, online payments have been done for decades outside of the App Store and fraud has never been a dealbreaker (turns out banks and card networks give you a lot of recourse against it even for debit cards).

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

>this is a flagrant violation of App Store rules. Rules that many believe are unjust, hence this making it to court. >I do think that it's reasonable to restrict third party payment processors, though. It's inconvenient Paying for goods has never been easier especially with all the payment app integrations like paypal, cash app, venmo, etc. I want choice and I want Apple to compete by being a better product not by being the only game in town. If Apple opened up they would gain me as a customer.

Nextgrid 5y ago

> It's inconvenient, dangerous, and provides little in the way of antifraud measures The major card networks have rules that give customers recourse in case of fraud or missing/faulty goods regardless of the processor and card type. Some countries have laws that strengthen these protections even more, though it's usually limited to credit cards. The "antifraud" narrative about how the App Store is so much better at fraud protection is annoying (especially considering how many scam apps there are).

jussij 5y ago

> I actually think Apple's, "only our payment system can be used," system is reasonable. .... But I also don't think Apple should be able to prevent an app from advertising their own payment system out of the app. Aren't those two positions mutually exclusive? You can't have your cake and eat it too.