Apple pulls Match.com app for violating App Store policy, skirting 30% cut

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
Apple has removed an app by Match.com because the developer allowed users to subscribe to the dating service via a direct link within the app, a violation of Apple's App Store policies for in app subscriptions.



Apple's policy states "Apps can read or play approved content that is subscribed to or purchased outside of the app, as long as there is no button or external link in the app to purchase the approved content," wording that supports services like Amazon's Kindle app, Netflix, or Hulu.



Match.com sells subscriptions to its online dating service that would similarly pass App Store rules if its app hadn't included a link directing would-be subscribers to sign up for the service on the company's own site, rather than offering only in app subscriptions that go thorough Apple's servers, for which Apple asks for its 30 percent revenue cut.



Apple's subscription policies have drawn criticism from a variety of companies that insist that they can't afford to split their revenue with Apple in exchange for gaining access to the App Store market the company created for iOS devices.

«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 37
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,360member
    That makes perfect sense.



    Match.com must be pretty stupid if they think that Apple would never notice their violations and disregard for the rules.



    If somebody wants their app on the appstore, then they either follow the rules or they can get lost. The choice is theirs.
  • Reply 2 of 37
    To expound on the above, Apple has created a means by which an individual, small company, or large company can become very wealthy very quickly without the archaic mess of distribution channels and storefront deals.



    And they were the first to do it wildly successfully and to critical acclaim.



    Asking for a percentage of said individual/company's income is a small price to pay for said privilege. Or they can do it the way people did it last millennium and make physical software or host their own sites for their stuff.
  • Reply 3 of 37
    Idiots. Who would try to meet someone through their iPhone anywho?
  • Reply 4 of 37
    I think this is a fair policy on Apple's part... they take care of all the distribution and charge a fee. If a company wants to make their service available on iOS without paying they can still do that through HTML5, so it's not even like Apple is forcing them to enter the App Store to be accessible.
  • Reply 5 of 37
    It's amazing that people considered Microsoft a Monopoly but now that is called Apple things are different, why should anyone be obligated to pay a fee to Apple for a service not wanted or done by others!!!
  • Reply 6 of 37
    Ha Ha Dummies
  • Reply 7 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SaltWater View Post


    It's amazing that people considered Microsoft a Monopoly but now that is called Apple things are different



    because Apple don't actually have a monopoly perhaps?
  • Reply 8 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SaltWater View Post


    It's amazing that people considered Microsoft a Monopoly but now that is called Apple things are different, why should anyone be obligated to pay a fee to Apple for a service not wanted or done by others!!!



    If it's not "wanted", why would you want to use it? If it's not done by others, what do you call the Android Marketplace and the Windows Phone 7? Lemonade? Stand? ?
  • Reply 9 of 37
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,360member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SaltWater View Post


    It's amazing that people considered Microsoft a Monopoly but now that is called Apple things are different, why should anyone be obligated to pay a fee to Apple for a service not wanted or done by others!!!



    I don't think that monopoly means what you think it means.
  • Reply 10 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SaltWater View Post


    It's amazing that people considered Microsoft a Monopoly but now that is called Apple things are different, why should anyone be obligated to pay a fee to Apple for a service not wanted or done by others!!!



    Uh....it's not a monopoly if it's your service within your service. Apple can do what they want. They're not regulated in this case. It would only be a monopoly if nobody could make apps and only apple could. Different case.
  • Reply 11 of 37
    8002580025 Posts: 172member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Match.com sells subscriptions to its online dating service that would similarly pass App Store rules if its app hadn't included a link directing would-be subscribers to sign up for the service on the company's own site, rather than offering only in app subscriptions that go thorough Apple's servers, for which Apple asks for its 30 percent revenue cut.



    Apple's subscription policies have drawn criticism from a variety of companies that insist that they can't afford to split their revenue with Apple in exchange for gaining access to the App Store market the company created for iOS devices.





    Good heavens. If the 'varieties' of companies spent as much time whining as they do marketing their goods and/or services, they'd do a whole lot more to improve their bottom line(s).



    As good as the App Store is as an integrated marketing and sales platform, it's not the only marketing/sales vehicle for the complainers. Stop making it appear that you're being excluded from any and all sales. Apple charges what it charges, just like any other marketing vehicle. Try complaining to a major newspaper about the cost of an 1/4 page above the fold advertisement and see how far you get.



    Better to use a marketing service within your current budget and when you can afford more, upgrade. Don't expect Apple or anyone else to reduce their prices just because YOU can't afford them.



    And as to match.com, you got caught. Next time follow the rules.
  • Reply 12 of 37
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,805member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 80025 View Post


    Good heavens. If the 'varieties' of companies spent as much time whining as they do marketing their goods and/or services, they'd do a whole lot more to improve their bottom line(s).



    As good as the App Store is as an integrated marketing and sales platform, it's not the only marketing/sales vehicle for the complainers. Stop making it appear that you're being excluded from any and all sales. Apple charges what it charges, just like any other marketing vehicle. Try complaining to a major newspaper about the cost of an 1/4 page above the fold advertisement and see how far you get.



    Better to use a marketing service within your current budget and when you can afford more, upgrade. Don't expect Apple or anyone else to reduce their prices just because YOU can't afford them.



    And as to match.com, you got caught. Next time follow the rules.



    Very well said.
  • Reply 13 of 37
    desuserigndesuserign Posts: 1,316member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Very well said.



    Not really.

    At least not this part:



    "If the 'varieties' of companies spent as much time whining as they do marketing their goods and/or services, they'd do a whole lot more to improve their bottom line(s). "
  • Reply 14 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rugby_kid View Post


    Uh....it's not a monopoly if it's your service within your service. Apple can do what they want. They're not regulated in this case. It would only be a monopoly if nobody could make apps and only apple could. Different case.



    Apple does have a monopoly--it is in software distribution for the iPhone. If I'm a developer and I want to write software for the iPhone, I don't have the option of any other distribution channel outside the App Store if I disagree with Apple's terms. Perhaps one could claim that jailbreaking and the Cydia app store show that there is not a monopoly on iPhone software distribution, but the fact that you have to jailbreak your iPhone first weakens that argument.



    Think of it this way--what if Apple locked down OS X where the ONLY way to get software for your Mac was via the Mac App Store? Would that not constitute a monopoly on Mac software distribution?



    Having a monopoly itself may not be illegal, but abusing it is--look at Microsoft in the 1990s abusing its monopoly on the desktop OS market. Could this be an abuse of Apple's monopoly on the iOS software distribution monopoly? Perhaps it is.
  • Reply 15 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    To expound on the above, Apple has created a means by which an individual, small company, or large company can become very wealthy very quickly without the archaic mess of distribution channels and storefront deals.



    And they were the first to do it wildly successfully and to critical acclaim.



    Asking for a percentage of said individual/company's income is a small price to pay for said privilege. Or they can do it the way people did it last millennium and make physical software or host their own sites for their stuff.



    Actually, they cannot. Your only choice for iOS software distribution is the App Store. If you could use the Cydia store without jailbreaking you may have a point, but because you have to go to extra steps to get outside the iOS walled garden, that argument is weakened considerably.
  • Reply 16 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by frdmfghtr View Post


    Actually, they cannot.



    They can't sell software pressed onto spinning disc media read with a laser and purchased from your local store?



    Quote:

    Your only choice for iOS software distribution is the App Store.



    But iOS is not your only choice for software distribution. That's the argument.
  • Reply 17 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    They can't sell software pressed onto spinning disc media read with a laser and purchased from your local store?







    But iOS is not your only choice for software distribution. That's the argument.



    The argument as I read it revolves around software for iOS, not other platforms. I can't go to my local software store of choice, buy an iOS app and install it. I have to go through the App Store. And that is where the monopoly lies.
  • Reply 18 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by frdmfghtr View Post


    And that is where the monopoly lies.



    I'm fairly certain that you're unsure what a monopoly entails.
  • Reply 19 of 37
    jexusjexus Posts: 373member
    Wait a minute. From the sounds of this agreement, couldn't Match.com simply have put out an App that requires registration from the website prior to Mobile use and avoided the 30% anyway?
  • Reply 20 of 37
    8002580025 Posts: 172member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Very well said.



    Thank you, gatorguy. I appreciate your positive comment.
Sign In or Register to comment.