3 ms·

> … except for apps on the United States storefront, the apps may not… US based app developers hosting apps on app stores in other countries should also be cov

> … except for apps on the United States storefront, the apps may not… US based app developers hosting apps on app stores in other countries should also be covered by the injunction. What am I missing? Is the injunction only covering US based app market? And does not cover app developers? Tim, come back. The deed is yet to be completed.

CrimsonRain 1y ago
My question also.
layer8 1y ago
Apple’s wording is “apps on the United States storefront” [0], so apps on the US app store only. [0] https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#payments https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#pay...
- saurik 1y ago
  Right. We get that's what's Apple is doing, but the question is whether it satisfies the injunction. FWIW, I will claim it does not: it should cover--at least for any developer in the United States--any app published by any Apple-affiliated entity, anywhere, and certainly covers Apple's centrally managed global store.
  - layer8 1y ago
    I’m no expert, but it may be the case that if you place an app on, say, the EU app store, you’re technically doing business in the EU, not the US, and are therefore subject to EU law, not US law. Wasn’t that the case with the DSA requirements? https://techcrunch.com/2025/02/18/apple-purges-apps-without-contact-info-from-eu-app-store-as-dsa-deadline-hits/ https://techcrunch.com/2025/02/18/apple-purges-apps-without-...
    - saurik 1y ago
      Even if I accept Apple's definition that such a developer is directly doing business in the EU, the injunction applies to "Apple, Inc. and its officers, agents, servants, employees, and any person in active concert or participation with them", which certainly includes the direction they provide to the people they hire to operate their storefronts in other countries (particularly so as this is, as I stated, a centrally-managed system run out of the United States).
      - layer8 1y ago
        Eh, I don’t think it works that way. Apple’s EU subsidiaries are separate legal entities, and everything that happens on the EU app store is not an activity that occurs within the US and would be subject to US federal law. Even Tim Sweeney implicitly acknowledged this: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/04/30/epic-games-apple-peace-proposal/ https://www.macrumors.com/2025/04/30/epic-games-apple-peace-...
        saurik 1y ago
        The EU app store--even as a separate legal entity--doesn't operate independently: it takes its marching orders from Apple, Inc., and Apple, Inc. has been required to not do this thing to developers, not merely directly but indirectly even by persons (which includes corporations) they are merely "in active concert or participation with". The EU app store doesn't even have a separate submission portal or a separate approval process, much less any autonomy in its operation: it is certainly covered by this injunction.
        nashashmi 1y ago
        Companies other than apple inc would not be covered. However, subsidiaries should be covered. And app store in europe must be a subsidiary.
        layer8 1y ago
        I'm pretty sure that international law doesn't work in that way. For example, the foreign-country subsidiary also doesn't have to pay US taxes.

CrimsonRain 1y ago

My question also.

layer8 1y ago

Apple’s wording is “apps on the United States storefront” [0], so apps on the US app store only. [0] https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#payments https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#pay...

saurik 1y ago
Right. We get that's what's Apple is doing, but the question is whether it satisfies the injunction. FWIW, I will claim it does not: it should cover--at least for any developer in the United States--any app published by any Apple-affiliated entity, anywhere, and certainly covers Apple's centrally managed global store.
- layer8 1y ago
  I’m no expert, but it may be the case that if you place an app on, say, the EU app store, you’re technically doing business in the EU, not the US, and are therefore subject to EU law, not US law. Wasn’t that the case with the DSA requirements? https://techcrunch.com/2025/02/18/apple-purges-apps-without-contact-info-from-eu-app-store-as-dsa-deadline-hits/ https://techcrunch.com/2025/02/18/apple-purges-apps-without-...
  - saurik 1y ago
    Even if I accept Apple's definition that such a developer is directly doing business in the EU, the injunction applies to "Apple, Inc. and its officers, agents, servants, employees, and any person in active concert or participation with them", which certainly includes the direction they provide to the people they hire to operate their storefronts in other countries (particularly so as this is, as I stated, a centrally-managed system run out of the United States).
    - layer8 1y ago
      Eh, I don’t think it works that way. Apple’s EU subsidiaries are separate legal entities, and everything that happens on the EU app store is not an activity that occurs within the US and would be subject to US federal law. Even Tim Sweeney implicitly acknowledged this: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/04/30/epic-games-apple-peace-proposal/ https://www.macrumors.com/2025/04/30/epic-games-apple-peace-...
      - saurik 1y ago
        The EU app store--even as a separate legal entity--doesn't operate independently: it takes its marching orders from Apple, Inc., and Apple, Inc. has been required to not do this thing to developers, not merely directly but indirectly even by persons (which includes corporations) they are merely "in active concert or participation with". The EU app store doesn't even have a separate submission portal or a separate approval process, much less any autonomy in its operation: it is certainly covered by this injunction.
        nashashmi 1y ago
        Companies other than apple inc would not be covered. However, subsidiaries should be covered. And app store in europe must be a subsidiary.
        layer8 1y ago
        I'm pretty sure that international law doesn't work in that way. For example, the foreign-country subsidiary also doesn't have to pay US taxes.