4 ms·

I don't think the DMA factors into it too much. In the Netherlands, AirBnB got fined for billing service costs both to renters and landlords. I think the legal

I don't think the DMA factors into it too much. In the Netherlands, AirBnB got fined for billing service costs both to renters and landlords. I think the legal term was 'serving two lords' or something along those lines. Dutch law (and I suspect European law) prohibits billing intermediary fees to both sides. I'm very much being an armchair lawyer, but you can probably make a very similar case here: the user has already paid for the Core TechnologyTM as part of the phone, therefore you can't bill app creators for the same thing. (Disclaimer: I'm no lawyer, armchair or otherwise)

turquoisevar 3y ago
That was due to a specific statute on intermediary fees in tenancy laws. It doesn’t silly to this situation. Disclaimer: was an attorney, now just of the armchair variety when I’m not buy as a code monkey, NL was where I went to law school
- superice 3y ago
  A quick google search seemed to indicate it was a general e-commerce related law, which is why I brought it up, but happy to take your word over mine.
  - turquoisevar 3y ago
    Actually, you might be right and I might be wrong. It’s been a few years since I’ve left the low lands and a bit longer since I stopped practicing law, so who knows what has happened in the meantime. I mainly jumped on it because I know of a rental specific statute, having used it a few times, so just assumed that’s what you were talking about. I haven’t looked into it further so it might just as well be that I was too confident in thinking that’s what you were talking about.
SllX 3y ago
That should be easy for Apple then. They bill developers for the developer program (tools, APIs, entitlements, etc.) and sell users the phone.
- km3r 3y ago
  They already do bill for the developer program with the $100/year developer fee. Tying it to installs also makes no sense if the fee is for the dev tools.
  - Spivak 3y ago
    Why? Unity seemingly legally though not popularly tied the licensing fee for use of the engine to number of installs.
    - lozenge 3y ago
      Because Unity isn't legally a gatekeeper under the DMA.
  - SllX 3y ago
    Well, no, it’s $100/year for the developer fee plus the 15-30% you paid to Apple if you charged money anywhere, which in the US is now 12-27% if you subtract Apple’s payment processing portion and soon in the EU this new complex scheme which I don’t even want to summarize, but amounts to a price drop in some circumstances and a price increase in other circumstances. There can be 3rd party app stores now but nobody who develops for the platform is taking advantage of the features and APIs Apple invested their own money and developer time into building out without paying Apple something above a certain threshold. I mean whether it’s the EU or Epic, Apple isn’t interested in letting anybody just co-opt their baby.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      >plus the 15-30% you paid to Apple if you charged money anywhere, well yes. That's part of the rub. You'll pay $100/year even if you never launch an app so that makes sense. That's the cost of using Apple's SDK. But you may now pay $.50 per install even for a free app if you don't/can't host outside of the App store, unless you declare your company/business a non-profit or educational instituion. This was previously $0. So the price hike can become absurd, to say the least. >Apple isn’t interested in letting anybody just co-opt their baby. Well tough luck. you made more money off your "baby" than many country's GDP. Microsoft got co-opted for much less decades ago. Governments' interest is in making sure companies do not in fact hoard all the money in the world, and when your product becomes a centerpiece of society something's got to give.

turquoisevar 3y ago

That was due to a specific statute on intermediary fees in tenancy laws. It doesn’t silly to this situation. Disclaimer: was an attorney, now just of the armchair variety when I’m not buy as a code monkey, NL was where I went to law school

superice 3y ago
A quick google search seemed to indicate it was a general e-commerce related law, which is why I brought it up, but happy to take your word over mine.
- turquoisevar 3y ago
  Actually, you might be right and I might be wrong. It’s been a few years since I’ve left the low lands and a bit longer since I stopped practicing law, so who knows what has happened in the meantime. I mainly jumped on it because I know of a rental specific statute, having used it a few times, so just assumed that’s what you were talking about. I haven’t looked into it further so it might just as well be that I was too confident in thinking that’s what you were talking about.

SllX 3y ago

That should be easy for Apple then. They bill developers for the developer program (tools, APIs, entitlements, etc.) and sell users the phone.

km3r 3y ago
They already do bill for the developer program with the $100/year developer fee. Tying it to installs also makes no sense if the fee is for the dev tools.
- Spivak 3y ago
  Why? Unity seemingly legally though not popularly tied the licensing fee for use of the engine to number of installs.
  - lozenge 3y ago
    Because Unity isn't legally a gatekeeper under the DMA.
- SllX 3y ago
  Well, no, it’s $100/year for the developer fee plus the 15-30% you paid to Apple if you charged money anywhere, which in the US is now 12-27% if you subtract Apple’s payment processing portion and soon in the EU this new complex scheme which I don’t even want to summarize, but amounts to a price drop in some circumstances and a price increase in other circumstances. There can be 3rd party app stores now but nobody who develops for the platform is taking advantage of the features and APIs Apple invested their own money and developer time into building out without paying Apple something above a certain threshold. I mean whether it’s the EU or Epic, Apple isn’t interested in letting anybody just co-opt their baby.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    >plus the 15-30% you paid to Apple if you charged money anywhere, well yes. That's part of the rub. You'll pay $100/year even if you never launch an app so that makes sense. That's the cost of using Apple's SDK. But you may now pay $.50 per install even for a free app if you don't/can't host outside of the App store, unless you declare your company/business a non-profit or educational instituion. This was previously $0. So the price hike can become absurd, to say the least. >Apple isn’t interested in letting anybody just co-opt their baby. Well tough luck. you made more money off your "baby" than many country's GDP. Microsoft got co-opted for much less decades ago. Governments' interest is in making sure companies do not in fact hoard all the money in the world, and when your product becomes a centerpiece of society something's got to give.