9 ms·

Apple complies with Dutch ruling, lets dating apps use other payment systems

148 points by sAbakumoff 5y ago

tinus_hn 5y ago
Allowing dating apps to use other payment systems.
londons_explore 5y ago
So theoretically a dating app could today add a PayPal button or stripe pay box. They don't even need to go through appstore review if they add it to a webview server side. So... Have any apps done this yet? Seems like the kind of thing that could be pushed out in a few hours by some teams.
- kotaKat 5y ago
  Apple will pull it for not going through the StoreKit entitlement process.
  - my123 5y ago
    Using StoreKit allows Apple to measure the number of purchases done, to take their cut.
- supreme_berry 5y ago
  They still are going to pay a fee to Apple.
wdb 5y ago
Nice, so they going to lower the subscription prices now that they don't need to pay the 30% cut from Apple?
- the_other 5y ago
  Not if you believe the complaints that 30% is too much “Apple Tax”. No, they’ll keep the price the same and use the profit to improve their apps and business model. (Can you see my crossed fingers?)
- bradly 5y ago
  They have now seen consumers are willing to pay the higher price with the 30%, so it would seem unlikely to me.
- cute_boi 5y ago
  "The ruling allows dating app developers to avoid the commission fee between 15 to 30 percent Apple charges. " Looks like everybody gangsta till regulator steps in.
  - gonzo41 5y ago
    Apple is/was just making hay whilst the sun shined. I know many on this site would disagree, but regulation generally is for everyone's benefit. Just like a healthy progressive taxation system.
    - mlindner 5y ago
      Most regulations I have been directly impacted by that have happened since I was born have made my life harder or worse in some way, so I strongly disagree. Two easy examples: Obama passing health care regulations greatly increased my health insurance costs. EPA mandating new regulations on "safety" of gas cans has made gas cans nearly unusable with dangerous splashing of gasoline when using them.
      - jkaplowitz 5y ago
        Obamacare's impacts varied. In NY, Obamacare at least temporarily lowered healthcare premiums despite being a new regulation. Most of those rules were already in place within NY state law, but the introduction of the employer and individual mandates added many healthy people to the risk pool, fixing a pre-existing adverse selection problem and therefore lowering premiums. The Obamacare risk corridor provisions also helped. I only say "at least temporarily" lowering premiums to reflect subsequent events, like the removal of the individual mandate and the risk corridor, and the general increase in healthcare costs over time.
      - maccard 5y ago
        I can point to dozens of regulations in the EU that have made my life better as a resident of an EU country. Some very easy examples off the top of my head that I have benefitted from; no roaming charges between EU countries, PDO regulations, EURO standards for car fuel, Freedom of movement in the EU (and pet passports), Flight compensation and working time directive. Sure I can pick some out that suck, but that doesn't mean that they are all bad; overwhelmingly they are positive changes.
- axlee 5y ago
  It's already the case: if you buy your subscription on tinder.com rather than within the app itself, it is noticeably cheaper.
- echelon 5y ago
  Not necessarily. Now smaller software shops can now make a healthy margin to pay their engineers and grow their product. This will result in higher quality software and services.
- olliej 5y ago
  No. The commission charged by apple is not a payment processing fee. It's a platform licensing fee, as has been common practice in the industry since day 1. What this means is that the companies are allowed to use a separate company to charge users, and now they are required to manage refunds, etc themselves in line with local laws and the apple license. Now they also have to manually track everything and pay apple the appropriate 15-30% licensing fee.
informationslob 5y ago
So what does this mean store Epic Games and fortnite? Well it be coming back to the app store?
- cute_boi 5y ago
  I don't think so but the title seems to be generalized too much. "The ruling allows dating app developers to avoid the commission fee ..." It says dating apps so I don't think apple allowed other app to bypass the rule. But good thing is it sets a precedence.
bekantan 5y ago
According to Dutch authorities, dating apps were first on the list because they generated the most complaints. They don't confirm or deny that this will continue with other apps.
saagarjha 5y ago
To provide more insight, this is what the process is: * There are two new entitlements related to this, which you ask Apple to give you if you're a dating app. * Once you get the entitlements, you need to create a new version of your app (it cannot be the same as your international one) that will ship exclusively in the Netherlands with that entitlement. * Details of how this entitlement work will come at a later date. * Apple will still charge a commission on these purchases, the details of which will also come at a later date. * It is your privilege/responsibility to conflict resolution with regards to refunds and such. In essence, Apple complied with the law in the narrowest terms they could, but they did indeed change things and I suspect many companies will go through this process even if it's made somewhat inconvenient. I guess what remains to be seen is if these entitlements slowly get rolled out in other countries as they also enact legislation to require it.
- imchillyb 5y ago
  > ...Apple complied with the law... This is the only part that matters here. Doesn't matter how narrowly the law was complied with. Laws are the purview of lawmakers. If the lawmakers leave loopholes in their legislation all companies that can will avail themselves of these loopholes. Blame the legislators. Those assholes left barn-door sized loopholes in their legal requirements for Apple's compliance.
  - solarkraft 5y ago
    You can be pretty sure that Apple lobbied hard to leave these holes. The legislators are happy they can tell their voters they finally did something and that they found a compromise. It's a bit on us, the public, to not accept those alibi-type compromises.
    - Maarten88 5y ago
      I think Apple does not hold much sway over lawmakers here in the Netherlands. US tech companies are not very popular in general, and politicians are not corrupt for the most part. Many laws originate in Brussels. Incompetence/cluelessness and lack of resources around tech is the bigger problem here.
gruez 5y ago
>The ruling allows dating app developers to avoid the commission fee between 15 to 30 percent Apple charges Was this actually confirmed? I remember in the epic vs apple lawsuit (in the US), the media reported something similar, but if you read the decision more carefully, it explicitly says that apple was still entitled to their 30%/15% cut. The logic was that the 30%/15% cut wasn't the fee paid for processing payments, it was also the fee paid for access to the ecosystem, SDK, and placement on the app store.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  IIRC, the loophole gave Apple the right to bill you afterwards for the use of their services. I don't know if that means they tally the 30% and come back to collect later, or just pass the direct charges of hosting onto you, but in any case I doubt Apple would be ballsy enough to try that outside the United States.
  - supreme_berry 5y ago
    That’s not loophole. That’s common sense.
    - smoldesu 5y ago
      Which part? I think retroactively billing people for arbitrary values like "30%" is dumb, since it doesn't actually address the issues people have. I wouldn't be mad if Apple passed me an itemized bill for my hosting costs and whatnot, but without that kind of transparency it still feels like I'm being scammed.
      - gruez 5y ago
        >I think retroactively billing people for arbitrary values like "30%" is dumb [...] >[...] without that kind of transparency it still feels like I'm being scammed It's not arbitrary because it was part of the developer agreement you signed. >since it doesn't actually address the issues people have Must all regulator action "actually address the issues people have"? Regulators/courts are limited in what they can do, so it's not surprising that the ruling isn't some sort of decisive victory for independent software companies.
einarfd 5y ago
I wonder if this law is similar with legislation in other EU countries? My impression is that consumer legislation usually is. If it is. This might end up being EU wide in the future.
- toyg 5y ago
  Even if it isn't, because of the Common Market any EU company can just open an entity in the Netherlands and start using this trick. The next step is for somebody else to sue to remove the limit to dating apps, which is obviously ridiculous (and likely still not compliant with NL law). After that, the door is effectively opened for the whole Union. I expect at that point Apple will just allow it for all EU countries, with much fanfare, trying to spin it as them doing good for us plebs.
arbirk 5y ago
Developers still have to pay Apple a commission on transactions. https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement/ https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl... As in the Epic case, this interestingly expands the number of transactions that apple could potentially claim commissions for (in-app and out-of-app) depending on the specific definition of a transaction. In the case of dating apps nearly all user-activity is within the app, so Apple could claim that all transactions for iOS uses are within scope. This will of course be negotiated and settled in some way, but as long as the 30% cut has not been deemed illegal, Apple can still demand the cut on relevant transactions.
Jnr 5y ago
EU should follow.
cronix 5y ago
And the mighty walled garden breaks into smaller walled gardens. Eventually each country will have its own version of each app to comply with local laws.
olliej 5y ago
Everyone is quoting 30%. For the majority of apps it's 15%. That commission is not a payment processing fee, it's very clearly a platform commission as has been common in the industry for 30-40 years at this point. All this (and the similar rulings elsewhere) seem to confirm is that * A developer can use their own preferred payment processor * A developer still has to pay the platform commission Finally, no one in their right mind should think that even if there was a reduction in commission that prices would decrease. We already have direct evidence: Both Google and Apple dropped platform commission to 15% for the vast majority of apps and there was no reduction in app prices. Additionally it is common sense: app devs already know that you will pay X for an app, if they get an arbitrary reduction in expenses through any mechanism why would they reduce their prices? This is the same flaw present in trickle-down economics. The price for anything is determined by what the market will bare, not the cost of production - this is as true for an app, as it is for an NFT, as it is for a banana.
- bagacrap 5y ago
  my economics 101 teacher would argue that a reduction in cost would encourage certain app makers to seek greater market share by undercutting their competitors. Unless competing app makers collude, prices should be loosely based on cost.

148 points by sAbakumoff 5y ago

Allowing dating apps to use other payment systems.

So theoretically a dating app could today add a PayPal button or stripe pay box. They don't even need to go through appstore review if they add it to a webview server side. So... Have any apps done this yet? Seems like the kind of thing that could be pushed out in a few hours by some teams.

kotaKat 5y ago
Apple will pull it for not going through the StoreKit entitlement process.
- my123 5y ago
  Using StoreKit allows Apple to measure the number of purchases done, to take their cut.
supreme_berry 5y ago
They still are going to pay a fee to Apple.

wdb 5y ago

Nice, so they going to lower the subscription prices now that they don't need to pay the 30% cut from Apple?

the_other 5y ago
Not if you believe the complaints that 30% is too much “Apple Tax”. No, they’ll keep the price the same and use the profit to improve their apps and business model. (Can you see my crossed fingers?)
bradly 5y ago
They have now seen consumers are willing to pay the higher price with the 30%, so it would seem unlikely to me.
cute_boi 5y ago
"The ruling allows dating app developers to avoid the commission fee between 15 to 30 percent Apple charges. " Looks like everybody gangsta till regulator steps in.
- gonzo41 5y ago
  Apple is/was just making hay whilst the sun shined. I know many on this site would disagree, but regulation generally is for everyone's benefit. Just like a healthy progressive taxation system.
  - mlindner 5y ago
    Most regulations I have been directly impacted by that have happened since I was born have made my life harder or worse in some way, so I strongly disagree. Two easy examples: Obama passing health care regulations greatly increased my health insurance costs. EPA mandating new regulations on "safety" of gas cans has made gas cans nearly unusable with dangerous splashing of gasoline when using them.
    - jkaplowitz 5y ago
      Obamacare's impacts varied. In NY, Obamacare at least temporarily lowered healthcare premiums despite being a new regulation. Most of those rules were already in place within NY state law, but the introduction of the employer and individual mandates added many healthy people to the risk pool, fixing a pre-existing adverse selection problem and therefore lowering premiums. The Obamacare risk corridor provisions also helped. I only say "at least temporarily" lowering premiums to reflect subsequent events, like the removal of the individual mandate and the risk corridor, and the general increase in healthcare costs over time.
    - maccard 5y ago
      I can point to dozens of regulations in the EU that have made my life better as a resident of an EU country. Some very easy examples off the top of my head that I have benefitted from; no roaming charges between EU countries, PDO regulations, EURO standards for car fuel, Freedom of movement in the EU (and pet passports), Flight compensation and working time directive. Sure I can pick some out that suck, but that doesn't mean that they are all bad; overwhelmingly they are positive changes.
axlee 5y ago
It's already the case: if you buy your subscription on tinder.com rather than within the app itself, it is noticeably cheaper.
echelon 5y ago
Not necessarily. Now smaller software shops can now make a healthy margin to pay their engineers and grow their product. This will result in higher quality software and services.
olliej 5y ago
No. The commission charged by apple is not a payment processing fee. It's a platform licensing fee, as has been common practice in the industry since day 1. What this means is that the companies are allowed to use a separate company to charge users, and now they are required to manage refunds, etc themselves in line with local laws and the apple license. Now they also have to manually track everything and pay apple the appropriate 15-30% licensing fee.

informationslob 5y ago

So what does this mean store Epic Games and fortnite? Well it be coming back to the app store?

cute_boi 5y ago
I don't think so but the title seems to be generalized too much. "The ruling allows dating app developers to avoid the commission fee ..." It says dating apps so I don't think apple allowed other app to bypass the rule. But good thing is it sets a precedence.

bekantan 5y ago

According to Dutch authorities, dating apps were first on the list because they generated the most complaints. They don't confirm or deny that this will continue with other apps.

saagarjha 5y ago

To provide more insight, this is what the process is: * There are two new entitlements related to this, which you ask Apple to give you if you're a dating app. * Once you get the entitlements, you need to create a new version of your app (it cannot be the same as your international one) that will ship exclusively in the Netherlands with that entitlement. * Details of how this entitlement work will come at a later date. * Apple will still charge a commission on these purchases, the details of which will also come at a later date. * It is your privilege/responsibility to conflict resolution with regards to refunds and such. In essence, Apple complied with the law in the narrowest terms they could, but they did indeed change things and I suspect many companies will go through this process even if it's made somewhat inconvenient. I guess what remains to be seen is if these entitlements slowly get rolled out in other countries as they also enact legislation to require it.

imchillyb 5y ago
> ...Apple complied with the law... This is the only part that matters here. Doesn't matter how narrowly the law was complied with. Laws are the purview of lawmakers. If the lawmakers leave loopholes in their legislation all companies that can will avail themselves of these loopholes. Blame the legislators. Those assholes left barn-door sized loopholes in their legal requirements for Apple's compliance.
- solarkraft 5y ago
  You can be pretty sure that Apple lobbied hard to leave these holes. The legislators are happy they can tell their voters they finally did something and that they found a compromise. It's a bit on us, the public, to not accept those alibi-type compromises.
  - Maarten88 5y ago
    I think Apple does not hold much sway over lawmakers here in the Netherlands. US tech companies are not very popular in general, and politicians are not corrupt for the most part. Many laws originate in Brussels. Incompetence/cluelessness and lack of resources around tech is the bigger problem here.

gruez 5y ago

>The ruling allows dating app developers to avoid the commission fee between 15 to 30 percent Apple charges Was this actually confirmed? I remember in the epic vs apple lawsuit (in the US), the media reported something similar, but if you read the decision more carefully, it explicitly says that apple was still entitled to their 30%/15% cut. The logic was that the 30%/15% cut wasn't the fee paid for processing payments, it was also the fee paid for access to the ecosystem, SDK, and placement on the app store.

smoldesu 5y ago
IIRC, the loophole gave Apple the right to bill you afterwards for the use of their services. I don't know if that means they tally the 30% and come back to collect later, or just pass the direct charges of hosting onto you, but in any case I doubt Apple would be ballsy enough to try that outside the United States.
- supreme_berry 5y ago
  That’s not loophole. That’s common sense.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    Which part? I think retroactively billing people for arbitrary values like "30%" is dumb, since it doesn't actually address the issues people have. I wouldn't be mad if Apple passed me an itemized bill for my hosting costs and whatnot, but without that kind of transparency it still feels like I'm being scammed.
    - gruez 5y ago
      >I think retroactively billing people for arbitrary values like "30%" is dumb [...] >[...] without that kind of transparency it still feels like I'm being scammed It's not arbitrary because it was part of the developer agreement you signed. >since it doesn't actually address the issues people have Must all regulator action "actually address the issues people have"? Regulators/courts are limited in what they can do, so it's not surprising that the ruling isn't some sort of decisive victory for independent software companies.

einarfd 5y ago

I wonder if this law is similar with legislation in other EU countries? My impression is that consumer legislation usually is. If it is. This might end up being EU wide in the future.

toyg 5y ago
Even if it isn't, because of the Common Market any EU company can just open an entity in the Netherlands and start using this trick. The next step is for somebody else to sue to remove the limit to dating apps, which is obviously ridiculous (and likely still not compliant with NL law). After that, the door is effectively opened for the whole Union. I expect at that point Apple will just allow it for all EU countries, with much fanfare, trying to spin it as them doing good for us plebs.

arbirk 5y ago

Developers still have to pay Apple a commission on transactions. https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement/ https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl... As in the Epic case, this interestingly expands the number of transactions that apple could potentially claim commissions for (in-app and out-of-app) depending on the specific definition of a transaction. In the case of dating apps nearly all user-activity is within the app, so Apple could claim that all transactions for iOS uses are within scope. This will of course be negotiated and settled in some way, but as long as the 30% cut has not been deemed illegal, Apple can still demand the cut on relevant transactions.

Jnr 5y ago

EU should follow.

cronix 5y ago

And the mighty walled garden breaks into smaller walled gardens. Eventually each country will have its own version of each app to comply with local laws.

olliej 5y ago

Everyone is quoting 30%. For the majority of apps it's 15%. That commission is not a payment processing fee, it's very clearly a platform commission as has been common in the industry for 30-40 years at this point. All this (and the similar rulings elsewhere) seem to confirm is that * A developer can use their own preferred payment processor * A developer still has to pay the platform commission Finally, no one in their right mind should think that even if there was a reduction in commission that prices would decrease. We already have direct evidence: Both Google and Apple dropped platform commission to 15% for the vast majority of apps and there was no reduction in app prices. Additionally it is common sense: app devs already know that you will pay X for an app, if they get an arbitrary reduction in expenses through any mechanism why would they reduce their prices? This is the same flaw present in trickle-down economics. The price for anything is determined by what the market will bare, not the cost of production - this is as true for an app, as it is for an NFT, as it is for a banana.

bagacrap 5y ago
my economics 101 teacher would argue that a reduction in cost would encourage certain app makers to seek greater market share by undercutting their competitors. Unless competing app makers collude, prices should be loosely based on cost.