5 ms·

You joke, but legally they could. If game engines can charge a licence fee as a % of revenue from games developed on those engines, then legally there's not muc

You joke, but legally they could. If game engines can charge a licence fee as a % of revenue from games developed on those engines, then legally there's not much to stop apple doing the same. Of course consumers and enterprises wouldn't tolerate it, but the barrier is commercial rather than legal.

hahahahhaah 9mo ago
Guess it is no different than Docker Desktop charging based on your revenue. The idea being charging based on some second order.
willtemperley 9mo ago
[flagged]
- Wazako 9mo ago
  What is absurd is finding yourself paying 30% on every digital item purchased on a smartphone app. It would never even occur to us that Microsoft takes a 30% margin on Steam, yet that is what happens on webtoon apps.
  - willtemperley 9mo ago
    Microsoft don't really have an equivalent to iOS so let's compare oranges to oranges: macOS vs Windows. On macOS, Apple don't take a 30% cut on Steam purchases. Steam take 30% however. There's a big difference - when you develop an app for iOS or macOS, using Apple's APIs, platform and app store tech, it's reasonable to pay Apple something and they legally can charge. I don't actually have an opinion on whether 30% or 15% is too much or not. It's factually wrong or illogical arguments that bother me: how can we fight anything when the arguments are just nonsensical. Apple make plenty of user-hostile decisions, but people need to criticise them reasonably, otherwise they will be ignored by those that might have the influence to change things for the better.
    - pjc50 9mo ago
      > when you develop an app for iOS or macOS, using Apple's APIs, platform and app store tech, it's reasonable to pay Apple something Is it? We spent several decades of the PC world, MSDOS and Windows, with zero platform license fees or approvals. This was hugely beneficial for innovation, and this is why everyone hates the sudden rise of platform landlordism.
      - willtemperley 9mo ago
        You're perfectly entitled to distribute a macOS app with your own paywall, the same as ever. Nothing has changed from that perspective. Rent-seeking on SaaS platforms is far worse I think, e.g. $30 per month for 10GB of data in a recent offering I was looking at, and who knows where the data are. Some datacenter in a foreign land with a mad king probably.
        pjc50 9mo ago
        > You're perfectly entitled to distribute a macOS app with your own paywall Are you sure the ToS allows that? Given the "anti-steering" rules? Can you point me to an example that isn't by a megacorp? > $30 per month for 10GB of data in a recent offering I was looking at, and who knows where the data are That's worse pricing than my mobile contract!
        willtemperley 9mo ago
        Scroll to the bottom: https://developer.apple.com/macos/distribution/ https://developer.apple.com/macos/distribution/
        pjc50 9mo ago
        Isn't the "outside the app store" bit entirely new, and forced on them by the EU? Doesn't change that if you distribute inside the app store, the app store rules ban you from any kind of external payment system.
  - newsclues 9mo ago
    Remember when software was sold in a box with a paper manual in a store? Before App Store and steam, retailers and publishers of games and software also took their share of the revenue from the work software developers created. Their cut wasn’t small. If the government stepped in to regulate the sales of software (to protect developers and consumers?) do you think: A) apps will cost less B) the government won’t want their cut
    - willtemperley 9mo ago
      Gov't taking a cut from tha App store is already happening [1] and it's a legitimate concern unlike the concept of Apple taking cuts from people's salary (LOL). [1] https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/02/12/app-store-and-japanese-consumption-tax/ https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/02/12/app-store-and-japanese-co...
      - direwolf20 9mo ago
        So they aren't exempt from sales tax in Japan, and they're crying about it?
    - freedomben 9mo ago
      Yeah but there was a big difference: As a developer you could opt out of that distribution and go your own way. I knew people who sold floppies out of their garage. IBM or whoever made your hardware, and Microsoft or whoever made your OS, could not prevent your users from installing your software on their machine.
  - direwolf20 9mo ago
    Microsoft threatened to take 30% margin on all Steam transactions. That's why Valve embraced Linux and made the Steam Deck and Steam Machine. Valve already takes a 30% cut of all Steam transactions. It's just corporations fighting to steal each other's revenue streams.
    - root_axis 9mo ago
      > Microsoft threatened to take 30% margin on all Steam transactions. That's why Valve embraced Linux and made the Steam Deck and Steam Machine. This is totally made up.
      - direwolf20 9mo ago
        Let me clarify. Microsoft did not approach Valve and say "give us 30% or else." Valve saw that Microsoft was moving in the same direction of Apple where their devices would be locked down and only run software from their store, felt threatened, and decided they couldn't remain tied to that ecosystem.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
- edoloughlin 9mo ago
  It’s reductio ad absurdum to make a point. But you could argue that income from Patreon forms part/all of a creator’s salary. I don’t agree that this is an Apple hating thread. Its commentary on a pretty despicable action that Apple is taking.
  - piekvorst 9mo ago
    “Despicable” is by an order of magnitude softer word compared to “Apple can legally take your salary” Sure, Apple is greedy. But it doesn’t deserve what is usually assumed: legal persecution.
  - willtemperley 9mo ago
    > It’s reductio ad absurdum It's not, it's just factually wrong. If Apple can legally claim 30% of your salary then a doctor using an iPad to demonstrate results of a scan to a patient has to pay Apple 30% of their consultation fee. That's reductio ad absurdum. Lol.
    - spacebanana7 9mo ago
      > If Apple can legally claim 30% of your salary then a doctor using an iPad to demonstrate results of a scan to a patient has to pay Apple 30% of their consultation fee. Apple could absolutely do this. They could say that professional medical use of macOS requires a commercial license, and the price of that commercial licence could be linked to revenue. Doctors - or rather their hospital IT/procurement departments - would be held to the terms of service they agree to. Far more rigorously than ordinary consumers.
      - willtemperley 9mo ago
        If that were legally enforcable, which is almost certainly not the case, Microsoft and Google could do the same, making your argument moot in this context.
        spacebanana7 9mo ago
- subscribed 9mo ago
  Can't they add a rent clause to the ToS of MacOS, claiming that any commercial use (work for money) requires commercial licence?
  - willtemperley 9mo ago
    Can Bic add a ToS to using their biros, so 15% of contract value goes to them if it's signed with their pen?
- e_y_ 9mo ago
  It would likely get voided as unconscionable if they just unilaterally demanded it, but it might hold up in specific circumstances (if the user is well-aware of the salary demand when they accepted the contract, and the user gets some proportionate value out of giving Apple a percentage of salary).
- pjc50 9mo ago
  This is based on the controversial Unreal licensing, which is percent of revenue: https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/license https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/license
dwaite 9mo ago
I've long believes that the requirement to use in-app purchasing was to make such revenue sharing easier to audit - if you can only use Apple's payment system to do certain things (or else your app isn't approved), then Apple doesn't have to worry about things like audits. Since various countries have regulated the ability to do third party payments from apps, Apple has since added API to launch said payments, to help generate statistics on use so that they can then demand third party auditing that the commissions are still being properly paid. In the US there was a court decision that they couldn't meter or charge commission, which may very well be walked back and will lead to lots of fun future articles.

hahahahhaah 9mo ago

Guess it is no different than Docker Desktop charging based on your revenue. The idea being charging based on some second order.

willtemperley 9mo ago

[flagged]

Wazako 9mo ago
What is absurd is finding yourself paying 30% on every digital item purchased on a smartphone app. It would never even occur to us that Microsoft takes a 30% margin on Steam, yet that is what happens on webtoon apps.
- willtemperley 9mo ago
  Microsoft don't really have an equivalent to iOS so let's compare oranges to oranges: macOS vs Windows. On macOS, Apple don't take a 30% cut on Steam purchases. Steam take 30% however. There's a big difference - when you develop an app for iOS or macOS, using Apple's APIs, platform and app store tech, it's reasonable to pay Apple something and they legally can charge. I don't actually have an opinion on whether 30% or 15% is too much or not. It's factually wrong or illogical arguments that bother me: how can we fight anything when the arguments are just nonsensical. Apple make plenty of user-hostile decisions, but people need to criticise them reasonably, otherwise they will be ignored by those that might have the influence to change things for the better.
  - pjc50 9mo ago
    > when you develop an app for iOS or macOS, using Apple's APIs, platform and app store tech, it's reasonable to pay Apple something Is it? We spent several decades of the PC world, MSDOS and Windows, with zero platform license fees or approvals. This was hugely beneficial for innovation, and this is why everyone hates the sudden rise of platform landlordism.
    - willtemperley 9mo ago
      You're perfectly entitled to distribute a macOS app with your own paywall, the same as ever. Nothing has changed from that perspective. Rent-seeking on SaaS platforms is far worse I think, e.g. $30 per month for 10GB of data in a recent offering I was looking at, and who knows where the data are. Some datacenter in a foreign land with a mad king probably.
      - pjc50 9mo ago
        > You're perfectly entitled to distribute a macOS app with your own paywall Are you sure the ToS allows that? Given the "anti-steering" rules? Can you point me to an example that isn't by a megacorp? > $30 per month for 10GB of data in a recent offering I was looking at, and who knows where the data are That's worse pricing than my mobile contract!
        willtemperley 9mo ago
        Scroll to the bottom: https://developer.apple.com/macos/distribution/ https://developer.apple.com/macos/distribution/
        pjc50 9mo ago
        Isn't the "outside the app store" bit entirely new, and forced on them by the EU? Doesn't change that if you distribute inside the app store, the app store rules ban you from any kind of external payment system.
- newsclues 9mo ago
  Remember when software was sold in a box with a paper manual in a store? Before App Store and steam, retailers and publishers of games and software also took their share of the revenue from the work software developers created. Their cut wasn’t small. If the government stepped in to regulate the sales of software (to protect developers and consumers?) do you think: A) apps will cost less B) the government won’t want their cut
  - willtemperley 9mo ago
    Gov't taking a cut from tha App store is already happening [1] and it's a legitimate concern unlike the concept of Apple taking cuts from people's salary (LOL). [1] https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/02/12/app-store-and-japanese-consumption-tax/ https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/02/12/app-store-and-japanese-co...
    - direwolf20 9mo ago
      So they aren't exempt from sales tax in Japan, and they're crying about it?
  - freedomben 9mo ago
    Yeah but there was a big difference: As a developer you could opt out of that distribution and go your own way. I knew people who sold floppies out of their garage. IBM or whoever made your hardware, and Microsoft or whoever made your OS, could not prevent your users from installing your software on their machine.
- direwolf20 9mo ago
  Microsoft threatened to take 30% margin on all Steam transactions. That's why Valve embraced Linux and made the Steam Deck and Steam Machine. Valve already takes a 30% cut of all Steam transactions. It's just corporations fighting to steal each other's revenue streams.
  - root_axis 9mo ago
    > Microsoft threatened to take 30% margin on all Steam transactions. That's why Valve embraced Linux and made the Steam Deck and Steam Machine. This is totally made up.
    - direwolf20 9mo ago
      Let me clarify. Microsoft did not approach Valve and say "give us 30% or else." Valve saw that Microsoft was moving in the same direction of Apple where their devices would be locked down and only run software from their store, felt threatened, and decided they couldn't remain tied to that ecosystem.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
edoloughlin 9mo ago
It’s reductio ad absurdum to make a point. But you could argue that income from Patreon forms part/all of a creator’s salary. I don’t agree that this is an Apple hating thread. Its commentary on a pretty despicable action that Apple is taking.
- piekvorst 9mo ago
  “Despicable” is by an order of magnitude softer word compared to “Apple can legally take your salary” Sure, Apple is greedy. But it doesn’t deserve what is usually assumed: legal persecution.
- willtemperley 9mo ago
  > It’s reductio ad absurdum It's not, it's just factually wrong. If Apple can legally claim 30% of your salary then a doctor using an iPad to demonstrate results of a scan to a patient has to pay Apple 30% of their consultation fee. That's reductio ad absurdum. Lol.
  - spacebanana7 9mo ago
    > If Apple can legally claim 30% of your salary then a doctor using an iPad to demonstrate results of a scan to a patient has to pay Apple 30% of their consultation fee. Apple could absolutely do this. They could say that professional medical use of macOS requires a commercial license, and the price of that commercial licence could be linked to revenue. Doctors - or rather their hospital IT/procurement departments - would be held to the terms of service they agree to. Far more rigorously than ordinary consumers.
    - willtemperley 9mo ago
      If that were legally enforcable, which is almost certainly not the case, Microsoft and Google could do the same, making your argument moot in this context.
      - spacebanana7 9mo ago
subscribed 9mo ago
Can't they add a rent clause to the ToS of MacOS, claiming that any commercial use (work for money) requires commercial licence?
- willtemperley 9mo ago
  Can Bic add a ToS to using their biros, so 15% of contract value goes to them if it's signed with their pen?
e_y_ 9mo ago
It would likely get voided as unconscionable if they just unilaterally demanded it, but it might hold up in specific circumstances (if the user is well-aware of the salary demand when they accepted the contract, and the user gets some proportionate value out of giving Apple a percentage of salary).
pjc50 9mo ago
This is based on the controversial Unreal licensing, which is percent of revenue: https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/license https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/license

dwaite 9mo ago

I've long believes that the requirement to use in-app purchasing was to make such revenue sharing easier to audit - if you can only use Apple's payment system to do certain things (or else your app isn't approved), then Apple doesn't have to worry about things like audits. Since various countries have regulated the ability to do third party payments from apps, Apple has since added API to launch said payments, to help generate statistics on use so that they can then demand third party auditing that the commissions are still being properly paid. In the US there was a court decision that they couldn't meter or charge commission, which may very well be walked back and will lead to lots of fun future articles.