Illinois latest to try to mandate payments from outside the 'oppressive regime' App Store
Illinois senators have filed a bill that would require Apple and Google to allow alternative payment systems for app developers.
Illinois' new "Freedom to Subscribe Directly" act would prohibit Apple and Google from requiring developers to use first-party app marketplaces to sell their goods and services.
Basecamp, a software company based in Illinois, has publicly supported the new bill.
"Apple demanded we sell our new service through their payment processor, so they could take their 30% cut, or we'd be thrown out of the app store." Basecamp CTO David Heinemeier-Hansson told WGEM.
"Basecamp might have among the few companies willing to speak up but we are far from the only ones dealing with these oppressive regimes," he continued.
In recent years, Apple and Google have come under fire for their in-app payment systems. As a result, both have been heavily criticized for taking up to a 30 percent cut of sales and in-app purchases. However, even if Apple were required to provide alternative payment systems, the Cupertino-based tech giant has made it clear that it would still collect its share.
In November, a class-action lawsuit claimed Apple leveraged its popular iOS platform to create a closed ecosystem that locked customers into a software aftermarket saddled by App Store commissions, fees which continue to drive "supracompetetive" profits.
Facebook recently rolled out a new tool designed to help content creators earn money on its platform while sidestepping Apple's customary 30 percent cut of App Store transactions.
In early January, Apple for the first time said it would allow alternative payment systems in South Korea to comply with the new law. The company will provide an alternative payment system at a reduced service charge as part of the compliance plans turned into to the Korea Communications Commission.
Read on AppleInsider
Illinois' new "Freedom to Subscribe Directly" act would prohibit Apple and Google from requiring developers to use first-party app marketplaces to sell their goods and services.
Basecamp, a software company based in Illinois, has publicly supported the new bill.
"Apple demanded we sell our new service through their payment processor, so they could take their 30% cut, or we'd be thrown out of the app store." Basecamp CTO David Heinemeier-Hansson told WGEM.
"Basecamp might have among the few companies willing to speak up but we are far from the only ones dealing with these oppressive regimes," he continued.
In recent years, Apple and Google have come under fire for their in-app payment systems. As a result, both have been heavily criticized for taking up to a 30 percent cut of sales and in-app purchases. However, even if Apple were required to provide alternative payment systems, the Cupertino-based tech giant has made it clear that it would still collect its share.
In November, a class-action lawsuit claimed Apple leveraged its popular iOS platform to create a closed ecosystem that locked customers into a software aftermarket saddled by App Store commissions, fees which continue to drive "supracompetetive" profits.
Facebook recently rolled out a new tool designed to help content creators earn money on its platform while sidestepping Apple's customary 30 percent cut of App Store transactions.
In early January, Apple for the first time said it would allow alternative payment systems in South Korea to comply with the new law. The company will provide an alternative payment system at a reduced service charge as part of the compliance plans turned into to the Korea Communications Commission.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
Something’s gotta give. Right now the only apps benefiting from the current 30% cut are ad-driven ones. And ad driven apps suck and has been slowly lowering the quality of apps in the App Store for years.
Also, I don't think the Interstate Commerce Clause of the US Constitution would allow Illinois to enact the proposed law. But I'm hardly an expert on the matter.
and…
if they were making these laws to apply them equally across all sectors, it might be a good thing, but singling out tech is bullshit and driven by other big players who see potential revenue they simply can steal.
They intentionally misdirect - these aren’t credit card processing fees, they’re platform fees. Sure payment processing is part of what’s included, but that’s not all it is. Apple built this mall, from scratch, and there is infrastructure to engineer and pay for, marketing, etc.