10 ms·

Update on StoreKit External Entitlement for dating apps

72 points by tech234a 5y ago

rhizome 5y ago
"As we have previously said, we disagree with the ACM’s original order and are appealing it." Oh nothing, just some company interfering with a nation's democratically enabled oversight and consumer protection laws and policies.
- mschuster91 5y ago
  That's like literally why courts exist - to judge issues people as well as companies have with laws and executive orders based on these laws.
- withinboredom 5y ago
  Not to mention: choice. Most of my friends here in the Netherlands don’t have a credit card. Instead they have Maestro (a debit card — aka Pin — with a bank account number on it instead of a credit card number). If you want to sell things online in the Netherlands, iDeal (a payment system) or go home.
  - bnt 5y ago
    And you’re ok with that? An entire nation, single way of paying?
    - sbierwagen 5y ago
      Some countries are small. The Netherlands has a population of 17 million. About the size of Michigan and Arizona combined.
      - withinboredom 5y ago
        It’s size and population is really similar to the city of L.A. and outskirts IIrC.
    - withinboredom 5y ago
      Ist that similar to the US? You basically only have credit cards there. Even debit cards run on the same network these days.
  - yunohn 5y ago
    For context, because I see confused replies - Maestro (MC) and VPay (Visa) are subsidiaries setup to provide EU-mandated low transaction fees. You can always get an actual credit card, though you’d be hard-pressed to find an offline store that accepts it - usually only e-commerce.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  Interfering by...having an opinion and following the law even though they don't like it? That's a bizarre standard for interference. I guess the ideal democracy is the DPRK, where 100% of people vote for and support the same Glorious Leader.
  - tveita 5y ago
    They knew perfectly well they weren't complying with the order the first time, they're wilfully wasting everyone's time and they deserve every fine they get for it. They've gone from "I picked up one sock so technically I've now cleaned my room" level of compliance to "OK, OK, I picked up the other sock as well."
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  Appealing a court ruling you don't like is "interfering with a nation's" democracy? Is your view of democracy that it should not allow legal challenges?
  - rhizome 5y ago
    It's not a court ruling, it's a regulatory order. Here's some detail Apple didn't include: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/28/22999998/apple-bigger-fine-proposal-dutch-regulator-acm-netherlands-dating-apps https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/28/22999998/apple-bigger-fin... And no, not all oversight should be appealable. That's how it became nearly impossible to permanently fire bad police officers.
agluszak 5y ago
> As we have previously said, we disagree with the ACM’s original order and are appealing it. "As we have previously said, we don't want to give our users any freedom of choice and we won't give away a single penny from our monopoly"
- n8cpdx 5y ago
  Have you ever actually met or heard of a user (outside of software engineers on hacker news) that cares about this? I’d think the last 20+ years of the evolution of the internet would be clear enough evidence that: a) users don’t want choice about these kinds of things. b) even when users do get these kinds of choices, they either can’t be trusted to choose in their best interest (e.g. millions of people chose to install malware in the past 20 years) OR c) bad actors will learn to trick users into making the choices they want (e.g. Amazon changing button colors to trick people into doing things they don’t want to do) IMO trying to frame this as about “user choice” is disingenuous. There are benefits to not allowing choice in some case - I don’t know if you’ve ever had to call a company to cancel a subscription you’ve signed up for online, but that doesn’t happen to iOS IAP users.
  - striking 5y ago
    When have users been allowed to choose, in the "last 20+ years of the evolution of the internet"? I think if you allowed users to choose between xx% markup and being able to cancel subscriptions from a centralized place, there would be takers of both approaches.
    - mrmanner 5y ago
      > I think if you allowed users to choose between xx% markup and being able to cancel subscriptions from a centralized place, there would be takers of both approaches. Many people choose Android phones, which kind of proves your point :)
    - viro 5y ago
      Every piece of dark pattern research kinda disagrees with you.
silvestrov 5y ago
> must limit its use to the app in the Netherlands storefront Apple has still not learnt the lesson. EU will see this as another provocation by Apple and the US is going the same way. Governments are losing patience with Apple.
- gizmodo59 5y ago
  I will never subscribe to services for the most part if they don’t provide a way via Apple. I’m sorry but I don’t want to email, call someone, answer hundred questions of why I want to unsubscribe etc. I want a single click unsubscribe with no questions asked. A very handful of companies do this. If they earn my trust then I will, until then I prefer to do it via Apple.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - hallway_monitor 5y ago
    PayPal has been doing this for years. In fact just last week I unsubscribed from something with one click on the PayPal site.
    - jbverschoor 5y ago
      Yeah but then your account gets frozen for no reason
      - toyg 5y ago
        The point is that any payment processor can do the same thing, no Apple needed. And indeed that's what the new EU regulation will soon require.
        jbverschoor 5y ago
        Ture, but PayPal is notorious about this. So yeah, as a consumer, I like paypal. As a merchant, I'd never touch it
spideymans 5y ago
Regardless of whatever good intent regulators have for "freedom" or whatever, I feel like these efforts will just result in predatory developers having more freedom to prey on their users, and ultimately a worse experience for end users. These developers aren't righteous actors; they're just businesses, like any other, looking to extract as much money from their users. Ideally governments, and not Apple, would be regulating away this predatory behaviour, but I don't view that as a realistic prospect. Governments have never been great at regulating away anti-consumer behaviour.
- the_gipsy 5y ago
  Apple is also a business and therefore preys on their customers behind a veil of protectionism.
  - spideymans 5y ago
    I just want myself and consumers as a whole to be protected from predatory developers. Regarding the regulatory changes, I'd be happy with one of two things: A) Governments impose restrictions on third party developers that are largely similar to the consumer protection standards that Apple has imposed on developers, while opening up alternative payment platforms. B) Governments impose restrictions on Apple to prevent Apple from preying on their customers. However, governments are going down the path of removing whatever protections the App Store provided consumers, without replacing those protections with any other pro-consumer regulation. This is the absolute worst case scenario for me. We've seen time and time again how developers will prey on their users, particularly with subscriptions.
    - toyg 5y ago
      > governments are going down the path of removing whatever protections the App Store provided consumers, without replacing those protections As others pointed out, that's actually not true as far as the new EU regulation on the matter is concerned: it attempts to maintain principles that help users while removing monopolistic practices and abuses by gatekeepers. In any case, even if governments were to ban certain behaviours without mandating replacements, the responsibility for such outcome lies very plainly with the handful of giant platform vendors who strenuously refused to work with competition authorities in good faith - preferring instead to defend their monopolistic abuses to the last day - with Apple being the worst of the lot.

72 points by tech234a 5y ago

"As we have previously said, we disagree with the ACM’s original order and are appealing it." Oh nothing, just some company interfering with a nation's democratically enabled oversight and consumer protection laws and policies.

mschuster91 5y ago
That's like literally why courts exist - to judge issues people as well as companies have with laws and executive orders based on these laws.
withinboredom 5y ago
Not to mention: choice. Most of my friends here in the Netherlands don’t have a credit card. Instead they have Maestro (a debit card — aka Pin — with a bank account number on it instead of a credit card number). If you want to sell things online in the Netherlands, iDeal (a payment system) or go home.
- bnt 5y ago
  And you’re ok with that? An entire nation, single way of paying?
  - sbierwagen 5y ago
    Some countries are small. The Netherlands has a population of 17 million. About the size of Michigan and Arizona combined.
    - withinboredom 5y ago
      It’s size and population is really similar to the city of L.A. and outskirts IIrC.
  - withinboredom 5y ago
    Ist that similar to the US? You basically only have credit cards there. Even debit cards run on the same network these days.
- yunohn 5y ago
  For context, because I see confused replies - Maestro (MC) and VPay (Visa) are subsidiaries setup to provide EU-mandated low transaction fees. You can always get an actual credit card, though you’d be hard-pressed to find an offline store that accepts it - usually only e-commerce.
oh_sigh 5y ago
Interfering by...having an opinion and following the law even though they don't like it? That's a bizarre standard for interference. I guess the ideal democracy is the DPRK, where 100% of people vote for and support the same Glorious Leader.
- tveita 5y ago
  They knew perfectly well they weren't complying with the order the first time, they're wilfully wasting everyone's time and they deserve every fine they get for it. They've gone from "I picked up one sock so technically I've now cleaned my room" level of compliance to "OK, OK, I picked up the other sock as well."
jrochkind1 5y ago
Appealing a court ruling you don't like is "interfering with a nation's" democracy? Is your view of democracy that it should not allow legal challenges?
- rhizome 5y ago
  It's not a court ruling, it's a regulatory order. Here's some detail Apple didn't include: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/28/22999998/apple-bigger-fine-proposal-dutch-regulator-acm-netherlands-dating-apps https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/28/22999998/apple-bigger-fin... And no, not all oversight should be appealable. That's how it became nearly impossible to permanently fire bad police officers.

agluszak 5y ago

> As we have previously said, we disagree with the ACM’s original order and are appealing it. "As we have previously said, we don't want to give our users any freedom of choice and we won't give away a single penny from our monopoly"

n8cpdx 5y ago
Have you ever actually met or heard of a user (outside of software engineers on hacker news) that cares about this? I’d think the last 20+ years of the evolution of the internet would be clear enough evidence that: a) users don’t want choice about these kinds of things. b) even when users do get these kinds of choices, they either can’t be trusted to choose in their best interest (e.g. millions of people chose to install malware in the past 20 years) OR c) bad actors will learn to trick users into making the choices they want (e.g. Amazon changing button colors to trick people into doing things they don’t want to do) IMO trying to frame this as about “user choice” is disingenuous. There are benefits to not allowing choice in some case - I don’t know if you’ve ever had to call a company to cancel a subscription you’ve signed up for online, but that doesn’t happen to iOS IAP users.
- striking 5y ago
  When have users been allowed to choose, in the "last 20+ years of the evolution of the internet"? I think if you allowed users to choose between xx% markup and being able to cancel subscriptions from a centralized place, there would be takers of both approaches.
  - mrmanner 5y ago
    > I think if you allowed users to choose between xx% markup and being able to cancel subscriptions from a centralized place, there would be takers of both approaches. Many people choose Android phones, which kind of proves your point :)
  - viro 5y ago
    Every piece of dark pattern research kinda disagrees with you.

silvestrov 5y ago

> must limit its use to the app in the Netherlands storefront Apple has still not learnt the lesson. EU will see this as another provocation by Apple and the US is going the same way. Governments are losing patience with Apple.

gizmodo59 5y ago
I will never subscribe to services for the most part if they don’t provide a way via Apple. I’m sorry but I don’t want to email, call someone, answer hundred questions of why I want to unsubscribe etc. I want a single click unsubscribe with no questions asked. A very handful of companies do this. If they earn my trust then I will, until then I prefer to do it via Apple.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- hallway_monitor 5y ago
  PayPal has been doing this for years. In fact just last week I unsubscribed from something with one click on the PayPal site.
  - jbverschoor 5y ago
    Yeah but then your account gets frozen for no reason
    - toyg 5y ago
      The point is that any payment processor can do the same thing, no Apple needed. And indeed that's what the new EU regulation will soon require.
      - jbverschoor 5y ago
        Ture, but PayPal is notorious about this. So yeah, as a consumer, I like paypal. As a merchant, I'd never touch it

spideymans 5y ago

Regardless of whatever good intent regulators have for "freedom" or whatever, I feel like these efforts will just result in predatory developers having more freedom to prey on their users, and ultimately a worse experience for end users. These developers aren't righteous actors; they're just businesses, like any other, looking to extract as much money from their users. Ideally governments, and not Apple, would be regulating away this predatory behaviour, but I don't view that as a realistic prospect. Governments have never been great at regulating away anti-consumer behaviour.

the_gipsy 5y ago
Apple is also a business and therefore preys on their customers behind a veil of protectionism.
- spideymans 5y ago
  I just want myself and consumers as a whole to be protected from predatory developers. Regarding the regulatory changes, I'd be happy with one of two things: A) Governments impose restrictions on third party developers that are largely similar to the consumer protection standards that Apple has imposed on developers, while opening up alternative payment platforms. B) Governments impose restrictions on Apple to prevent Apple from preying on their customers. However, governments are going down the path of removing whatever protections the App Store provided consumers, without replacing those protections with any other pro-consumer regulation. This is the absolute worst case scenario for me. We've seen time and time again how developers will prey on their users, particularly with subscriptions.
  - toyg 5y ago
    > governments are going down the path of removing whatever protections the App Store provided consumers, without replacing those protections As others pointed out, that's actually not true as far as the new EU regulation on the matter is concerned: it attempts to maintain principles that help users while removing monopolistic practices and abuses by gatekeepers. In any case, even if governments were to ban certain behaviours without mandating replacements, the responsibility for such outcome lies very plainly with the handful of giant platform vendors who strenuously refused to work with competition authorities in good faith - preferring instead to defend their monopolistic abuses to the last day - with Apple being the worst of the lot.