6 ms·
Apple Will Transition from the CTF to the CTC for EU Businesses
- ExoticPearTree 1y ago> App Store apps that communicate and promote offers for digital goods or services will be subject to new business terms for those transactions — an initial acquisition fee, store services fee, and for apps on the StoreKit External Purchase Link Entitlement (EU) Addendum, the Core Technology Commission (CTC). The CTC reflects value Apple provides developers through ongoing investments in the tools, technologies, and services that enable them to build and share innovative apps with users. It is not very clear from the press release: will developers still have to pay Apple even if their apps are coming from 3rd party AppStores? And if so, how much?
- v5v3 1y agoYes not clear at all, and intentionally so. A legal press release.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- lozenge 1y ago"The CTC will apply to digital goods or services sold by apps distributed from the App Store, Web Distribution, and/or alternative marketplaces." So yes, they'll pay the Core Technology Commission, apparently it's 5%. The per download fee will be phased out.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- akmarinov 1y agoSooo if you can freely distribute your apps on iOS now and you can steer people to your website for purchases (eg outside the Appstore) - doesn’t that mean that you can get away from paying the 5%?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- argsnd 1y agoI believe Apple still needs to review and sign every app
- benoau 1y agoI think there's at-least a 2% fee for that, but it's more convoluted than ever to calculate how much rent is owed for using your device.
- layer8 1y agoNo, see here: https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/#core-technology-commission https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/#... “By January 1, 2026, Apple plans to move to a single business model in the EU for all developers. Under this single business model, Apple will transition from the Core Technology Fee (CTF) to the CTC on digital goods or services. The CTC will apply to digital goods or services sold by apps distributed from the App Store, Web Distribution, and/or alternative marketplaces. “As of January 1, 2026, the CTC may be explicitly charged as a separate commission or, in certain cases, may be identified as a component of another commission and will apply to sales of digital goods or services usable in an app on Apple’s platforms. Additional details regarding this transition will be provided at a later date.” I.e. this applies to all apps, regardless of distribution channel. Apple will likely control this via the app review that still happens as part of the Notarization process, in conjunction with the StoreKit External Purchase Link Entitlement. I think there are SMB exemptions for the fees, though.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- uvas_pasas_per 1y agoWhat other industries can try this? For a restaurant built on a cement foundation... maybe the cement company can release a product to fix the cracks in their flawed mixture, and then demand 10% of every pizza sold in the building. ... I think the industry needs to get away from OS vendor tyranny, somehow.
- tirant 1y agoThis is already happening. But it’s not the cement company but the State. And you have no choice whatsoever.
- uvas_pasas_per 1y agoWell, the state I can accept - death and taxes. But has it now become "death, taxes, and commissions to the authors of operating systems"?
- v5v3 1y ago>What other industries can try this? I've never understood the Arts and royalties. If you write a software program for a client, you get paid. If a actor works for a day on a TV show he may get cheques forever. If you hire a photographer for a wedding, you will pay him the same rate as a contract developer. But you won't own the rights to the photos and keep having to pay the guy if you want copies. I can understand the owner of the TV show or owner of a song charging for commercial use, in the same way if you work for Gmail Google will sell the product forever. Gmail developers past and present don't get cheques every year.
- bombcar 1y agoYou can hire a photographer and get the photo rights. But it’ll cost more. Not tremendously more; about 20-50% more than expected profit.
- snowwrestler 1y agoOr something in between: for my wedding I got digital files and a perpetual license for personal use, so I can print and share with family, etc. That’s all I really wanted. The photographer kept her copyright.
- layer8 1y ago> App Store apps that communicate and promote offers for digital goods or services will be subject to new business terms for those transactions — an initial acquisition fee, store services fee, and for apps on the StoreKit External Purchase Link Entitlement (EU) Addendum, the Core Technology Commission (CTC). This means that for example the Kindle app on Apple's app store will continue to not offer in-app-initiated ebook purchases. I'm doubtful that the EC will deem this scheme to be fully compliant with the DMA.
- akmarinov 1y agoCome on, Apple, just let people sideload. 99.9% of people won’t bother at all, and if you put the opt in switch 3 levels deep in Settings 99.99% won’t even know it’s there. Feels like Tim Apple needs to go soon, Craig Apple looked to be more open to things from the court emails that were shown.
- lapcat 1y ago> Craig Apple looked to be more open to things from the court emails that were shown. I saw no evidence of that. Do you have a citation?
- akmarinov 1y agoSorry, meant Phil Schiller, the only one to question whether a 27% commission is wise. > Prior to the June 20 meeting, there were individuals within Apple who were advocating for a commission, and others advocating for no commission. Those advocating for a commission included Mr. Maestri and Mr. Roman. Mr. Schiller disagreed. In an email, Mr. Schiller relayed that, with respect to the proposal for “a 27% commission for 24 hours,” “I have already explained my many issues with the commission concept,” and that “clearly I am not on team commission/fee.” Mr. Schiller testified that, at the time, he “had a question of whether we would be able to charge a commission” under the Injunction, a concern which he communicated.
- lapcat 1y agoSchiller is now a semi-retired "Apple Fellow", so it seems unlikely that he would be the next CEO. Not to mention that Steve Jobs could have but didn't select Schiller as his successor.
- basisword 1y ago>> 99.9% of people won’t bother at all I'm not sure about this. Piracy is rampant on Android. "Cracked" versions of Spotify which enable premium for unpaid users are very common. Given developers often prioritise iOS due to the fact users are more willing to pay opening the platform up to piracy could have wide ranging effects on the marketplace as a whole.
- d--b 1y agoCan anyone summarize the legalese in English please? To me this is reading: we’re moving from extortion to racket
- saubeidl 1y agoThat's what it is basically. "The EU threatened to fine us for our anti-competitive behavior, so we rebranded it in hopes of not getting fined"
- msgodel 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- zuppy 1y agoI don’t think this will end well. EU is slow to move, but they will and it’s obvious that Apple is not acting in good faith. Whether the request of EU is right or not, they can legally impose some rules and they are binding as long as you are willing to sell in that market.
- horsawlarway 1y agoYeah, this piece is remarkably unclear in its message, but my read is similar. It sounds like they're not actually changing much at all, and continue to plan to charge a fee on software released through alternatives, like 3rd party marketplaces or the web. Personally - whoever thought that replacing "Fee" with "Commission" was a good call, when the words are literally synonyms (to the point that MW defines commission as "a fee paid to an agent") is smoking some drugs. --- My entire read here is: "We're changing some words to try the lawsuit again". I hope the penalty here from the EU is sharp and quick.
- saubeidl 1y agoThis is Tim Cook being an arrogant shithead towards the EU once again. This hubris is exactly how he got fined last time - it seems he didn't learn his lesson. > Vestager was well into the second half of her investigation, and she was unlikely to be swayed by the platitudes and buzzwords Cook came prepared to deliver. Nor did Cook advance his cause when he spent a one-on-one meeting interrupting and talking over her, according to those briefed on the encounter. Apple declined at the time to comment about the meeting. https://www.politico.eu/article/how-vestager-took-a-bite-out-of-apple/ https://www.politico.eu/article/how-vestager-took-a-bite-out...
- addicted 1y agoWho is advising Apple on these actions? Is it a team out of California? Because their approach to working with the EU seems pretty obviously unproductive and will (as it has in the past) hurt Apple, leading them to give up even more than they may have wanted, where if they worked collaboratively in good faith, they'd probably be able to negotiate the EU into a position more favorable to their preferences.
- saubeidl 1y agoI think Apple fundamentally does not understand the EU, what it's about, what it's goals are and how it operates. This article is a good read: https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2024/facing-reality-in-the-eu-and-tech/ https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2024/facing-reality-in-the-e... > Normally when the EU regulates a given sector, it does so with ample lead time and works with industry to make sure that they understand their obligations. > Apple instead thought that the regulatory contact from the EU during the lead time to the DMA was an opportunity for it to lecture the EU on its right to exist. Then its executives made up some fiction in their own minds as to what the regulation meant, announced their changes, only to discover later that they were full of bullshit. > This was entirely Apple’s own fault. For months, we’ve been hearing leaks about Apple’s talks with the EU about the Digital Market Act. Those talks were not negotiations even though Apple seems to have thought they were. Talks like those are to help companies implement incoming regulations, with some leeway for interpretation on the EU’s side to accommodate business interests. > If Apple had faced reality and tried to understand the facts as they are, they would have used the talks to clarify all of these issues and more well in advance of the DMA taking effect. > But they didn’t because they have caught the tech industry management disease of demanding that reality bend to their ideas and wishes
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]