3 ms·

The HoagLaw video mentions that the judge left the section of Apple's developer rules stating that you are required to use IAP for the apps themselves and for i

The HoagLaw video mentions that the judge left the section of Apple's developer rules stating that you are required to use IAP for the apps themselves and for in app digital goods in place, while striking the portion on anti-steering. To me, it sounds like the only applicable change is the same one already conceded to settle the Japanese antitrust investigation. At least if my reading that you are allowed to communicate with users without interference, but you are still required to use in-app purchases for digital goods consumed in the app is correct.

danShumway 5y ago
> is the same one already conceded to settle the Japanese antitrust investigation. Again, not making a hard claim here, because I'm not sure what the full range of the ruling is, but if what you're saying is true then it seems to me that this is a huge deal and I have no idea why people are minimizing its potential impact. The only reason why the Japanese antitrust concession wasn't a bigger deal was because it was narrowly applied to a small subset of apps and because Apple retained the exclusive ability to decide what those apps were. Just taking that earlier concession with no other changes and widening it to apply to the entire app store seems like a pretty impactful ruling to me.
simondotau 5y ago
The Japanese settlement was limited to so-called "reader" apps, but the court ruling will apply to all apps.
- GeekyBear 5y ago
  Everyone gained the right to communicate with users, but the contract that developers signed says that you are required to use IAP for buying apps and buying digital goods inside of apps, and the judge left that section of the contract intact. So the extent of the (effective) change for those not selling reader apps seems limited. At least that's my interpretation. I'm willing to assert that I got closer to the truth than the vast majority of the tech media outlets did yesterday.

danShumway 5y ago

> is the same one already conceded to settle the Japanese antitrust investigation. Again, not making a hard claim here, because I'm not sure what the full range of the ruling is, but if what you're saying is true then it seems to me that this is a huge deal and I have no idea why people are minimizing its potential impact. The only reason why the Japanese antitrust concession wasn't a bigger deal was because it was narrowly applied to a small subset of apps and because Apple retained the exclusive ability to decide what those apps were. Just taking that earlier concession with no other changes and widening it to apply to the entire app store seems like a pretty impactful ruling to me.

simondotau 5y ago

The Japanese settlement was limited to so-called "reader" apps, but the court ruling will apply to all apps.

GeekyBear 5y ago
Everyone gained the right to communicate with users, but the contract that developers signed says that you are required to use IAP for buying apps and buying digital goods inside of apps, and the judge left that section of the contract intact. So the extent of the (effective) change for those not selling reader apps seems limited. At least that's my interpretation. I'm willing to assert that I got closer to the truth than the vast majority of the tech media outlets did yesterday.