5 ms·

While I think Apple's rules are ridiculous, it is pretty standard in the industry. AirBnB doesn't allow hosts to accept cash or arrange alternative payment. Ama

by _xnmw 2y ago

While I think Apple's rules are ridiculous, it is pretty standard in the industry. AirBnB doesn't allow hosts to accept cash or arrange alternative payment. Amazon doesn't allow suppliers to offer direct sales to potential customers. Even Visa and Mastercard officially don't allow merchants to offer discounts for cash transactions (although many do anyway). Etc, etc. I think this should be a more general rule, no "platform" or "aggregator" should be allowed to prevent the free communication of users of their platform from arranging their deal elsewhere. Just because they met on the platform doesn't give the right to the platform to strong-arm their users into using them. The platform must compete with alternative payment methods on its own merits, such as convenience, security, etc., not by forcing people to use them just because they happen to be the matchmaker. Because this policy cements monopolies and rewards the largest incumbents.

xandrius 2y ago
Gotta start somewhere, going for the Trillion dollar behemoth is a good first step, in my opinion. And let's not forget that this standard is a de facto standard, not a regulatory one. Just because things have been done in this way, it doesn't mean they should remain like this forever. The EU is one of the few parties which can actually bring some change.
- KerrAvon 2y ago
  Then it should do so broadly and inclusive of actual technical expertise. It’s nitpicking fluff because Epic and Spotify are mad, and not addressing root causes. It’s easy (and often deserved) to dunk on the trillion-dollar corporation. And regulation is good, actually. But the DMA isn’t good regulation.
  - avianlyric 2y ago
    I’m not sure how they could have gone broader. The EU is saying that Apple payments offering need to compete on level playing field with other payment options. I don’t really see what being “inclusive of technical expertise” would bring to the table, beyond what’s already there.
ak217 2y ago
It's not really standard and I think the comparisons don't quite work. In Airbnb's case, Apple's policy is comparable to forbidding hosts from offering extra services (not related to lodging) to users off-platform once they begin their stay. In Amazon's case, it's like if Amazon banned manufacturers from including coupons for future direct purchases in the product packaging. In Visa and Mastercard's case, it's like banning merchants from mentioning other payment methods at all. I think it's abuse and I agree it should be forbidden as a class of behaviors. I would love to see Apple fined enough to deter anyone from trying what they did with Epic ever again.
- mastercheif 2y ago
  Would you consider an Airbnb property that offered $0.99 per night rates for max 1 night and then asked you arrange alternative payment for additional nights to be in violation of Airbnb policy?
  - lmm 2y ago
    > Would you consider an Airbnb property that offered $0.99 per night rates for max 1 night and then asked you arrange alternative payment for additional nights to be in violation of Airbnb policy? No, just a sucker. They would get bankrupted so fast Airbnb wouldn't have to do anything.
blackoil 2y ago
Airbnb is one of the many players and they don't have any practical sized lockin over consumer or vendors. While Apple is dominant force with complete lockin over all iPhone users.
- alt227 2y ago
  Exactly, If I choose to advertise my property on AirBnB, that doesnt mean I cant also let me my mates stay round for free, or rent it out to other people privately if I want to.
  - tpmoney 2y ago
    And if you sell your software or services on the App Store, that doesn’t mean you can’t give it away for free to your buddies or sell it somewhere else.
    - AlotOfReading 2y ago
      How else do you give it away free? The CTF applies to anyone with business revenue who meets the install requirements, even if you're not charging for that specific app. Development apps are time limited by Apple's terms. Furthermore, all of the limits exist solely at Apple's discretion. Apple is essentially being benevolent, not saying they have no claim to the transactions.
      - tpmoney 2y ago
        Same way anyone gives software away for free, put the source code up and give instructions for compiling / installing. That Apple imposes time limits on self installed applications is the user's problem, not the developer's. The user chose the platform, the consequences of that are theirs to bear. If they wanted to install arbitrary applications that weren't beholden to Apple's rules the options for that were always there. Apple's restrictions are well known and are as restrictive as they have ever been, there was no bait and switch here.
tpmoney 2y ago
On the other hand a mechanism of a number of online market place scams is to gain customers trading on the “security” (such as it is) of the market place, and then directing the customer out of the market place. Everyone (should) know that any eBay seller that tries to get you to complete the auction outside of eBay is likely to be a scam. Likewise I would hope anyone would be leery of placing an order on Amazon and having a seller contact you asking you to cancel that order and buy it cheaper on some other website. Reputation matters for consumers, and legitimate sellers rely on the market place’s good reputation to help smooth the sales process. Scammers do too, but their goal is to get you out of the market place ASAP where the rules and regulations are harder to get enforced. Companies like Apple and eBay have a strong incentive to have a trustable pipeline and mandate sellers to use it because even though they’re not the ones perpetuating the scam, being known as a market place where scammers hang out is damaging. Consider this, between the Apple Store, eBay and Craigslist, what order would you place those market places if ranking your level of trust for not getting scammed when providing your payment details for a recurring subscription to a random seller? Or put another way, even though it’s free and plenty of smaller companies do, Netflix doesn’t make posts of Craigslist advertising their services. There’s obviously many reasons for that, but at least part of it I’m sure is no one should trust a random link in a Craigslist post to a Netflix sign up site.
crowcroft 2y ago
The difference (or at least what would be argued as a difference) is that you have no other choice with Apple (Amazon maybe in a similar situation). If I didn't like AirBNB I could use VRBO/whatever else, or I could use both even. I can understand Apple's cut for app developers who solely create apps and distribute them through Apple. Where it becomes a problem is a large number of apps are just a way for the iPhone to connect to a larger product (Spotify, Basecamp, most SaaS companies), and I don't know why Apple should feel entitled to own the relationship with a businesses customers because they also use an iPhone when it's an ancillary part of the product.
- riscy 2y ago
  > I don't know why Apple should feel entitled to own the relationship with a businesses customers because they also use an iPhone when it's an ancillary part of the product. Apple provides a custom operating system (frameworks, drivers, security updates, backwards compatibility, etc) to make that business's app function, and continue to function, at all. You can write and maintain a website instead of an app to avoid that.
  - tebbers 2y ago
    Oh like a PWA? That Apple can cripple and has crippled at a moment's notice?
  - crowcroft 2y ago
    This would be a better argument if Apple didn't also lock down the capability of web browsers not called Safari.
    - riscy 2y ago
      On the bright side, having only one browser to support makes life a lot easier, too.
  - avianlyric 2y ago
    Landlords provide infrastructure (wall, roofs, electrical systems, plumbing, fire systems) needed for shops to function, or continue to function at all. Shops could just build their own market stands to avoid their landlords owning the relationship with their customers. Huh, that argument doesn’t seem as reasonable when applied to landlords and buildings. And yes, many app developers don’t pay much or anything to Apple, and shops always pay rent. But here’s the thing, as an Apple customer I pay Apple when I buy my phone. Why should Apple be allowed to double dip? It never seems reasonable when ISP want to charge their customers and content providers for bandwidth, so why is it reasonable for Apple to do something similar with Apps?
benced 2y ago
I mostly agree but I think iOS/Android/Windows (and maybe MacOS) are so important to our economy that they represent a difference in kind and should be regulated more stringently. I don't really care if vacation rentals are more expensive or worse than they should be, I do care if the software that mediates our lives is.
- nuker 2y ago
  > I do care if the software that mediates our lives is If you DO care about this, implementing this regulation as is will only make the software worse, not better. Apple did a good job so far keeping developers in check.
  - benced 2y ago
    This assumes the only thing that can make software worse for consumers is the developers that Apple "checks".
    - nuker 2y ago
      Is it not? Apple does check for unreasonable entitlements (permission requests) in apps. And for other creepiness too. And I like it very much. I think Apple users are underrepresented here, more developers here.
      - Aeolun 2y ago
        Honestly, the app store is so full of crud I find it hard to believe they’re really checking. I have zero faith in any app in the app store until I’ve inspected it myself.
      - benced 2y ago
        "only" is a really strong statement. Off the top of my head, here's a few situations where Apple makes things worse for the end-consumer: - Any case where Apple builds a competing product and charges a cut to the competitor that makes them structurally unable to compete is blatantly anti-competitive, i.e. Spotify vs Apple Music - Any case where the margins of the business do not support Apple's 30%, i.e. Kindle (let me buy my damn books in the app) - Any case where Apple has prohibited something for seemingly no reason, i.e. game emulators till about a month ago under regulatory pressure - Any case where Apple's unilateral control of pricing meant that certain business models couldn't be tried, i.e. subscriptions for a long part of the App Store's history, upgrade pricing today etc - Any case where Apple has prohibited anyone from competing with it. iOS Safari is bad and Apple has insulated it from competition by prohibited third-party browser engines. Note this hurts both users who'd rather use Chrome or Firefox and users who use Safari who don't benefit from Apple having to compete. I don't disagree that there are benefits to Apple's approach. I just think that they should be heavily scrutinized because of iOS's import.
WrongAssumption 2y ago
Visa and Mastercard do very explicitly allow cash discounts. https://usa.visa.com/content/dam/VCOM/global/support-legal/documents/merchant-surcharging-qa-for-web.pdf https://usa.visa.com/content/dam/VCOM/global/support-legal/d... What they didn’t allow previously was adding a surcharge to credit transactions. But regulation forced them to allow that as well. So not the best example overall.
- supergeek133 2y ago
  The State of MN stopped accepting certain credit cards for many DMV type activities, and now only accept ones that allow an explicit surcharge (Visa, Mastercard, Discover, Amex).
- hot_gril 2y ago
  With the important caveat that the surcharge can't be more than 3% or the fee, whichever is lowest. Is there a similar caveat for cash discounts?
- tumetab1 2y ago
  > Limit surcharging to credit cards only (debit cards and prepaid cards cannot be surcharged) This is just one of conditions, being "allowed" is very limited.
indoordin0saur 2y ago
The move is to create a closed-market and then collect rent. If your serfs don't like the terms, well, they can't really leave because of the collective action problem of buyers and sellers not being able to coordinate a move to a new platform.
tebbers 2y ago
Airbnb isn’t a duopoly.
proxyon 2y ago
> AirBnB doesn't allow hosts to accept cash or arrange alternative payment. Not a computer or operating system I paid for. > Amazon doesn't allow suppliers to offer direct sales to potential customers. Not a computer or operating system I paid for. > Even Visa and Mastercard officially don't allow merchants to offer discounts for cash transactions (although many do anyway). Etc, etc. Not a computer or operating system I paid for. In fact in every single case you listed a free platform that makes its money by charging fees per use. This is radically different from Apple's model. Apple makes computers. Apple iDevices are some of the most expensive computers on the market. Apple cloud services are some of the most expensive cloud services on the market. Apple's operating systems hardcode the software to the hardware, meaning neither phone nor laptop can be upgraded. In every single case these are expensive devices and services that people already own. They should be free to download whatever software they want without a monopolizer telling them what's allowed to run on them.

by _xnmw 2y ago

xandrius 2y ago

Gotta start somewhere, going for the Trillion dollar behemoth is a good first step, in my opinion. And let's not forget that this standard is a de facto standard, not a regulatory one. Just because things have been done in this way, it doesn't mean they should remain like this forever. The EU is one of the few parties which can actually bring some change.

KerrAvon 2y ago
Then it should do so broadly and inclusive of actual technical expertise. It’s nitpicking fluff because Epic and Spotify are mad, and not addressing root causes. It’s easy (and often deserved) to dunk on the trillion-dollar corporation. And regulation is good, actually. But the DMA isn’t good regulation.
- avianlyric 2y ago
  I’m not sure how they could have gone broader. The EU is saying that Apple payments offering need to compete on level playing field with other payment options. I don’t really see what being “inclusive of technical expertise” would bring to the table, beyond what’s already there.

ak217 2y ago

It's not really standard and I think the comparisons don't quite work. In Airbnb's case, Apple's policy is comparable to forbidding hosts from offering extra services (not related to lodging) to users off-platform once they begin their stay. In Amazon's case, it's like if Amazon banned manufacturers from including coupons for future direct purchases in the product packaging. In Visa and Mastercard's case, it's like banning merchants from mentioning other payment methods at all. I think it's abuse and I agree it should be forbidden as a class of behaviors. I would love to see Apple fined enough to deter anyone from trying what they did with Epic ever again.

mastercheif 2y ago
Would you consider an Airbnb property that offered $0.99 per night rates for max 1 night and then asked you arrange alternative payment for additional nights to be in violation of Airbnb policy?
- lmm 2y ago
  > Would you consider an Airbnb property that offered $0.99 per night rates for max 1 night and then asked you arrange alternative payment for additional nights to be in violation of Airbnb policy? No, just a sucker. They would get bankrupted so fast Airbnb wouldn't have to do anything.

blackoil 2y ago

Airbnb is one of the many players and they don't have any practical sized lockin over consumer or vendors. While Apple is dominant force with complete lockin over all iPhone users.

alt227 2y ago
Exactly, If I choose to advertise my property on AirBnB, that doesnt mean I cant also let me my mates stay round for free, or rent it out to other people privately if I want to.
- tpmoney 2y ago
  And if you sell your software or services on the App Store, that doesn’t mean you can’t give it away for free to your buddies or sell it somewhere else.
  - AlotOfReading 2y ago
    How else do you give it away free? The CTF applies to anyone with business revenue who meets the install requirements, even if you're not charging for that specific app. Development apps are time limited by Apple's terms. Furthermore, all of the limits exist solely at Apple's discretion. Apple is essentially being benevolent, not saying they have no claim to the transactions.
    - tpmoney 2y ago
      Same way anyone gives software away for free, put the source code up and give instructions for compiling / installing. That Apple imposes time limits on self installed applications is the user's problem, not the developer's. The user chose the platform, the consequences of that are theirs to bear. If they wanted to install arbitrary applications that weren't beholden to Apple's rules the options for that were always there. Apple's restrictions are well known and are as restrictive as they have ever been, there was no bait and switch here.

tpmoney 2y ago

On the other hand a mechanism of a number of online market place scams is to gain customers trading on the “security” (such as it is) of the market place, and then directing the customer out of the market place. Everyone (should) know that any eBay seller that tries to get you to complete the auction outside of eBay is likely to be a scam. Likewise I would hope anyone would be leery of placing an order on Amazon and having a seller contact you asking you to cancel that order and buy it cheaper on some other website. Reputation matters for consumers, and legitimate sellers rely on the market place’s good reputation to help smooth the sales process. Scammers do too, but their goal is to get you out of the market place ASAP where the rules and regulations are harder to get enforced. Companies like Apple and eBay have a strong incentive to have a trustable pipeline and mandate sellers to use it because even though they’re not the ones perpetuating the scam, being known as a market place where scammers hang out is damaging. Consider this, between the Apple Store, eBay and Craigslist, what order would you place those market places if ranking your level of trust for not getting scammed when providing your payment details for a recurring subscription to a random seller? Or put another way, even though it’s free and plenty of smaller companies do, Netflix doesn’t make posts of Craigslist advertising their services. There’s obviously many reasons for that, but at least part of it I’m sure is no one should trust a random link in a Craigslist post to a Netflix sign up site.

crowcroft 2y ago

The difference (or at least what would be argued as a difference) is that you have no other choice with Apple (Amazon maybe in a similar situation). If I didn't like AirBNB I could use VRBO/whatever else, or I could use both even. I can understand Apple's cut for app developers who solely create apps and distribute them through Apple. Where it becomes a problem is a large number of apps are just a way for the iPhone to connect to a larger product (Spotify, Basecamp, most SaaS companies), and I don't know why Apple should feel entitled to own the relationship with a businesses customers because they also use an iPhone when it's an ancillary part of the product.

riscy 2y ago
> I don't know why Apple should feel entitled to own the relationship with a businesses customers because they also use an iPhone when it's an ancillary part of the product. Apple provides a custom operating system (frameworks, drivers, security updates, backwards compatibility, etc) to make that business's app function, and continue to function, at all. You can write and maintain a website instead of an app to avoid that.
- tebbers 2y ago
  Oh like a PWA? That Apple can cripple and has crippled at a moment's notice?
- crowcroft 2y ago
  This would be a better argument if Apple didn't also lock down the capability of web browsers not called Safari.
  - riscy 2y ago
    On the bright side, having only one browser to support makes life a lot easier, too.
- avianlyric 2y ago
  Landlords provide infrastructure (wall, roofs, electrical systems, plumbing, fire systems) needed for shops to function, or continue to function at all. Shops could just build their own market stands to avoid their landlords owning the relationship with their customers. Huh, that argument doesn’t seem as reasonable when applied to landlords and buildings. And yes, many app developers don’t pay much or anything to Apple, and shops always pay rent. But here’s the thing, as an Apple customer I pay Apple when I buy my phone. Why should Apple be allowed to double dip? It never seems reasonable when ISP want to charge their customers and content providers for bandwidth, so why is it reasonable for Apple to do something similar with Apps?

benced 2y ago

I mostly agree but I think iOS/Android/Windows (and maybe MacOS) are so important to our economy that they represent a difference in kind and should be regulated more stringently. I don't really care if vacation rentals are more expensive or worse than they should be, I do care if the software that mediates our lives is.

nuker 2y ago
> I do care if the software that mediates our lives is If you DO care about this, implementing this regulation as is will only make the software worse, not better. Apple did a good job so far keeping developers in check.
- benced 2y ago
  This assumes the only thing that can make software worse for consumers is the developers that Apple "checks".
  - nuker 2y ago
    Is it not? Apple does check for unreasonable entitlements (permission requests) in apps. And for other creepiness too. And I like it very much. I think Apple users are underrepresented here, more developers here.
    - Aeolun 2y ago
      Honestly, the app store is so full of crud I find it hard to believe they’re really checking. I have zero faith in any app in the app store until I’ve inspected it myself.
    - benced 2y ago
      "only" is a really strong statement. Off the top of my head, here's a few situations where Apple makes things worse for the end-consumer: - Any case where Apple builds a competing product and charges a cut to the competitor that makes them structurally unable to compete is blatantly anti-competitive, i.e. Spotify vs Apple Music - Any case where the margins of the business do not support Apple's 30%, i.e. Kindle (let me buy my damn books in the app) - Any case where Apple has prohibited something for seemingly no reason, i.e. game emulators till about a month ago under regulatory pressure - Any case where Apple's unilateral control of pricing meant that certain business models couldn't be tried, i.e. subscriptions for a long part of the App Store's history, upgrade pricing today etc - Any case where Apple has prohibited anyone from competing with it. iOS Safari is bad and Apple has insulated it from competition by prohibited third-party browser engines. Note this hurts both users who'd rather use Chrome or Firefox and users who use Safari who don't benefit from Apple having to compete. I don't disagree that there are benefits to Apple's approach. I just think that they should be heavily scrutinized because of iOS's import.

WrongAssumption 2y ago

Visa and Mastercard do very explicitly allow cash discounts. https://usa.visa.com/content/dam/VCOM/global/support-legal/documents/merchant-surcharging-qa-for-web.pdf https://usa.visa.com/content/dam/VCOM/global/support-legal/d... What they didn’t allow previously was adding a surcharge to credit transactions. But regulation forced them to allow that as well. So not the best example overall.

supergeek133 2y ago
The State of MN stopped accepting certain credit cards for many DMV type activities, and now only accept ones that allow an explicit surcharge (Visa, Mastercard, Discover, Amex).
hot_gril 2y ago
With the important caveat that the surcharge can't be more than 3% or the fee, whichever is lowest. Is there a similar caveat for cash discounts?
tumetab1 2y ago
> Limit surcharging to credit cards only (debit cards and prepaid cards cannot be surcharged) This is just one of conditions, being "allowed" is very limited.

indoordin0saur 2y ago

The move is to create a closed-market and then collect rent. If your serfs don't like the terms, well, they can't really leave because of the collective action problem of buyers and sellers not being able to coordinate a move to a new platform.

tebbers 2y ago

Airbnb isn’t a duopoly.

proxyon 2y ago

> AirBnB doesn't allow hosts to accept cash or arrange alternative payment. Not a computer or operating system I paid for. > Amazon doesn't allow suppliers to offer direct sales to potential customers. Not a computer or operating system I paid for. > Even Visa and Mastercard officially don't allow merchants to offer discounts for cash transactions (although many do anyway). Etc, etc. Not a computer or operating system I paid for. In fact in every single case you listed a free platform that makes its money by charging fees per use. This is radically different from Apple's model. Apple makes computers. Apple iDevices are some of the most expensive computers on the market. Apple cloud services are some of the most expensive cloud services on the market. Apple's operating systems hardcode the software to the hardware, meaning neither phone nor laptop can be upgraded. In every single case these are expensive devices and services that people already own. They should be free to download whatever software they want without a monopolizer telling them what's allowed to run on them.