3 ms·

From the article: > They argued that a peer-to-peer app based on "decentralized" crypto technology "would allow iPhone users to send payments to each other wit

From the article: > They argued that a peer-to-peer app based on "decentralized" crypto technology "would allow iPhone users to send payments to each other without any intermediary at all." Kraken lets you access crypto that is held in custody by an exchange company. Ledger Live lets you access crypto that resides on a separate physical device. To the best of my reading, plaintiffs argue that Apple is preventing people from holding cryptocurrency on their iPhone. As in, the private keys are stored in the app's secure storage space, so the crypto is actually "in" the phone and not with a company or on a separate device. So to answer your question, that's what it seems plaintiffs are alleging that Apple prevents people from doing.

kstrauser 3y ago
Trust Wallet does exactly thaf. TBH I have no idea what the plaintiffs are actually contending.
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  you shouldn't trust Trust Wallet there have even been private key exposing bugs in it after the Binance acquisition too but yes, the conversation is about whether crypto wallets have been approved before in the app store, and that's true, its a seemingly tenuous relationship though
  - kstrauser 3y ago
    I don't. I have a Ledger hardware wallet now for the smidgen of Dogecoin that I hold onto for the fun of it. But I did have Trust Wallet for a little while, downloaded straight from the official App Store.
- everfree 3y ago
  After reading the lawsuit more closely, it seems like they’re arguing that Apple rejects applications that include cryptocurrency features but weren’t submitted by regulated financial institutions. One of their examples was a social network app that was rejected for including a crypto tipping feature.
  - threeseed 3y ago
    > but weren’t submitted by regulated financial institutions This was detailed on an Apple support page for an app submission: Guideline 3.1.5 - Business - Payments - Cryptocurrencies Your app facilitates the transmission of a virtual currency but was not submitted by a corresponding exchange or recognized financial institution. Next Steps To resolve this issue, please provide documentary evidence demonstrating you have the necessary licenses and permissions to distribute an app with cryptocurrency exchange features in all the locations where your app is currently available.
    - hanzmanner 3y ago
      Hard to disagree with Apple here. Crypto "absolutists" fail to acknowledge how prevalent crypto scams are, so a blanket enablement of any and all apps to have crypto payment features would be highly dangerous.
      - xp84 3y ago
        As "dangerous" as Safari, right? What difference does it being an app make? Apple's always so vigilant to keep us safe from danger in this one area of "payments that happen outside of the web browser" despite the fact that the web door is wide open and that's where scams always happen. I can't imagine Apple's allergy to crypto payments is anything other than an insurance policy against the likes of Epic getting ideas to launch a cryptocurrency, which conveniently can be used to pay for in-app digital goods, circumventing the holy 30% tithe that is due to Apple.
        acdha 3y ago
        > As "dangerous" as Safari, right? What difference does it being an app make? Apple’s pitch from day one has been that the App Store is more trustworthy: it launched in the era where a common joke this time of year was going to have thanksgiving with your parents and removing all of the malware they’d installed on the home PC. Part of the justification for the restrictions on developers was explicitly that they’d benefit from being in a place customers trust, kind of like how much effort companies will spend to get a prestige retailer to carry their lineup. > can't imagine Apple's allergy to crypto payments is anything other than an insurance policy against the likes of Epic getting ideas to launch a cryptocurrency This wouldn’t change the situation so there’s no reason to believe this is intended to be some 5-dimensional chess game rather than a simple desire not to play in a scammy space with a much higher risk of complaints and regulatory issues.

kstrauser 3y ago

Trust Wallet does exactly thaf. TBH I have no idea what the plaintiffs are actually contending.

yieldcrv 3y ago
you shouldn't trust Trust Wallet there have even been private key exposing bugs in it after the Binance acquisition too but yes, the conversation is about whether crypto wallets have been approved before in the app store, and that's true, its a seemingly tenuous relationship though
- kstrauser 3y ago
  I don't. I have a Ledger hardware wallet now for the smidgen of Dogecoin that I hold onto for the fun of it. But I did have Trust Wallet for a little while, downloaded straight from the official App Store.
everfree 3y ago
After reading the lawsuit more closely, it seems like they’re arguing that Apple rejects applications that include cryptocurrency features but weren’t submitted by regulated financial institutions. One of their examples was a social network app that was rejected for including a crypto tipping feature.
- threeseed 3y ago
  > but weren’t submitted by regulated financial institutions This was detailed on an Apple support page for an app submission: Guideline 3.1.5 - Business - Payments - Cryptocurrencies Your app facilitates the transmission of a virtual currency but was not submitted by a corresponding exchange or recognized financial institution. Next Steps To resolve this issue, please provide documentary evidence demonstrating you have the necessary licenses and permissions to distribute an app with cryptocurrency exchange features in all the locations where your app is currently available.
  - hanzmanner 3y ago
    Hard to disagree with Apple here. Crypto "absolutists" fail to acknowledge how prevalent crypto scams are, so a blanket enablement of any and all apps to have crypto payment features would be highly dangerous.
    - xp84 3y ago
      As "dangerous" as Safari, right? What difference does it being an app make? Apple's always so vigilant to keep us safe from danger in this one area of "payments that happen outside of the web browser" despite the fact that the web door is wide open and that's where scams always happen. I can't imagine Apple's allergy to crypto payments is anything other than an insurance policy against the likes of Epic getting ideas to launch a cryptocurrency, which conveniently can be used to pay for in-app digital goods, circumventing the holy 30% tithe that is due to Apple.
      - acdha 3y ago
        > As "dangerous" as Safari, right? What difference does it being an app make? Apple’s pitch from day one has been that the App Store is more trustworthy: it launched in the era where a common joke this time of year was going to have thanksgiving with your parents and removing all of the malware they’d installed on the home PC. Part of the justification for the restrictions on developers was explicitly that they’d benefit from being in a place customers trust, kind of like how much effort companies will spend to get a prestige retailer to carry their lineup. > can't imagine Apple's allergy to crypto payments is anything other than an insurance policy against the likes of Epic getting ideas to launch a cryptocurrency This wouldn’t change the situation so there’s no reason to believe this is intended to be some 5-dimensional chess game rather than a simple desire not to play in a scammy space with a much higher risk of complaints and regulatory issues.