Apple's iOS developer fees and charges again targeted by class action suit
An iOS developer on Friday lodged a class action complaint against Apple over alleged antitrust violations, claiming the company abuses its monopoly power of the iOS market to set price minimums, charge app makers a $99 annual developer fee and levy an effective 30% tax on sales.
Filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the suit alleges Apple's anticompetitive practices involve the acquisition of a monopoly in the iOS app market, refusal to allow third-parties to distribute digital content and foisting pricing requirements and "taxes" on developers.
Plaintiff Barry Sermons, who seeks class status on behalf of app developers, claims Apple's conduct has "caused developers to incur inflated fees, costs, and pricing for each app and in-app product" developed for iOS and "harmed competition by reducing competitors' ability to compete and incentive to innovate."
Sermons developed and markets seven for-pay apps including Morigo, Unity North Atlanta, Mielle Organics, dmvfta, Bovanti, sportsandspine and The Film Black Friday. He also created reVOLVER Podcast, which is no longer available on the App Store but carries on as an Android app and a popular podcasting network under the reVolver Podcasts banner.
According to the complaint, Apple is flouting antitrust laws with an ostensible 100% monopoly over iOS app distribution, a share won by not allowing iPhone and iPad users to download software through third-parties. Leveraging this alleged monopoly, Apple charges developers a "profit-reducing" 30% commission on each paid sale, including in-app purchases.
"There is no good, pro-competitive, otherwise justified reason. Rather, this unnatural price stability is a sure sign of Apple's unlawful acquisition of monopoly power and the abuse of that market power," the complaint reads.
Further, Apple charges developers a $99 annual fee for the right to sell products on the App Store. The company in 2017 updated its App Store Guidelines to reflect a change regarding code bases and templates that effectively requires developers to create a new $99-per-year account for each client app.
Finally, the suit targets Apple's pricing constraints, which dictate app makers sell their wares at no less than 99 cents and at higher price points ending in $.99.
The suit seeks to restrict Apple from further participating in the alleged anticompetitive behavior and award damages and court fees to the class.
Today's lawsuit is nearly identical to another class action filed earlier this month that takes issue with Apple's 30% cut of sales, annual fee and pricing mandates. Both actions site violation of the Sherman Act and California's Unfair Competition Law.
Filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the suit alleges Apple's anticompetitive practices involve the acquisition of a monopoly in the iOS app market, refusal to allow third-parties to distribute digital content and foisting pricing requirements and "taxes" on developers.
Plaintiff Barry Sermons, who seeks class status on behalf of app developers, claims Apple's conduct has "caused developers to incur inflated fees, costs, and pricing for each app and in-app product" developed for iOS and "harmed competition by reducing competitors' ability to compete and incentive to innovate."
Sermons developed and markets seven for-pay apps including Morigo, Unity North Atlanta, Mielle Organics, dmvfta, Bovanti, sportsandspine and The Film Black Friday. He also created reVOLVER Podcast, which is no longer available on the App Store but carries on as an Android app and a popular podcasting network under the reVolver Podcasts banner.
According to the complaint, Apple is flouting antitrust laws with an ostensible 100% monopoly over iOS app distribution, a share won by not allowing iPhone and iPad users to download software through third-parties. Leveraging this alleged monopoly, Apple charges developers a "profit-reducing" 30% commission on each paid sale, including in-app purchases.
"There is no good, pro-competitive, otherwise justified reason. Rather, this unnatural price stability is a sure sign of Apple's unlawful acquisition of monopoly power and the abuse of that market power," the complaint reads.
Further, Apple charges developers a $99 annual fee for the right to sell products on the App Store. The company in 2017 updated its App Store Guidelines to reflect a change regarding code bases and templates that effectively requires developers to create a new $99-per-year account for each client app.
Finally, the suit targets Apple's pricing constraints, which dictate app makers sell their wares at no less than 99 cents and at higher price points ending in $.99.
The suit seeks to restrict Apple from further participating in the alleged anticompetitive behavior and award damages and court fees to the class.
Today's lawsuit is nearly identical to another class action filed earlier this month that takes issue with Apple's 30% cut of sales, annual fee and pricing mandates. Both actions site violation of the Sherman Act and California's Unfair Competition Law.
IOS Developer Class Action by Mikey Campbell on Scribd
Comments
https://youtu.be/kAOm3APJopM
I'm not a developer, but Apple's App Store seems pretty straightforward to me. You pay your developer fee and you get to release your app and you get to set your own price point for the app. So what's the issue again? To be honest, I'm glad that there is at least a $99 yearly fee. If any developer has a problem with that, then their apps are probably not worth having there in the first place. It probably keeps some of the riff raff out of the store too, where you'd end up with a wild west, lunatic Android situation.
If any developer doesn't like Apple's policies, then go develop for something else. Too many people have this disgusting sense of entitlement these days. Their demands should all be smacked down.
BREAKING NEWS
The same developer is suing Safeway for charging manufacturers a “stocking fee” just to carry their products and gain access to the store’s customers. They then are marking the products up 30% to the consumer. Film at 11:00.
They did actually roll back part of those rules and say you can have a template app but the client themselves must submit it so yes in that case, each client needs an account. $99 a year is Apple's charge to host your advertising app .. and Apple also offered free developer accounts for non-profits, churches etc to ensure they had an avenue to have an appstore presence.
I'm pretty sure this one gets tossed.
Not sure if the plaintiffs are truly a-holes, but they are certainly guilty of severe narrow-mindedness and infected with a severe cause of self-entitlement. If they are smart enough to write a damn app maybe they should be smart enough to realize that someone else is carrying their sorry ass over a lot of big hurdles for a pittance compared to what they'd otherwise have to pay if they had to build it all themselves.
The bottom line is that if you are a professional software developer and you cannot afford the tools, license fees, and operational costs required to run your business and still make a profit, you are in the wrong business. Heck, you don't even have a legitimate business, you're playing with a hobby and need to find a real day job.
Bonus is is access to store. Then again company structures to do it properly are far more expensive than anything Apple charges.
Lowering the fee might result in some lower quality apps being submitted for review but I bet it would also lead to some genuinely innovative efforts too. Bedroom coders should be encouraged, not discouraged.