Isn’t it more like Railroad companies blocking competitors from driving their own trains and selling tickets on the Railroad companies tracks? That being said I kinda wish Epic would give up, I wanna play Fortnite again.
Well if the railroads were built and owned privately by railroad company A, why would they need to let rail company B use it for free or dictate any rules?
Should your ISP be able to decide what websites or online services you can use?
My thoughts on what should be regulated and what should be voluntary good behavior by Apple:
Apple should stop rent-seeking and any government regulation should narrowly target this and nothing else. There are a couple significant sources of rent seeking on the App Store: (1) Apple shouldn't require more than transaction fees from direct competitors to its first party services. (2) Non-platform content like eBooks or audio books shouldn't require more than a transaction fee.
Apple should introduce a creator-content level of App Store IAP fees when there are three parties involved. These creators are similar to small developers that Apple only takes 15% from anyway. Apple could ultimately take 15% from these transactions and allow the app developer to take another 15% for a 30% total fee.
The 30% fee is perfectly reasonable for games. Epic Games has nothing of merit to complain about when it comes to Fortnite.
Any place the agency model is traditionally used should be exempt from incompatible fees, but generally that is just non-platform content that is covered by the first bullet point.
The iPhone should not allow side-loading for security reasons, but Apple should voluntarily allow iPad (or at least iPad Pro) to side-load since it is marketed as a general purpose computer. It should allow open source software and complex workflows. With the direction that iPad is trending each release this feels inevitable. I don't think side-load should be required through any regulation since it is too blunt an instrument.
Apple should allow game streaming because it essentially transforms the iPhone in to an input peripheral for another device (even if that device is a cloud server). This shouldn't be limited much like Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony doesn't restrict Apple from adding game controller support to iOS. There should be no expectation of content moderating for this class of app if it is listed for adult maturity levels. I think it is fair not to allow such an app in the game category of the App Store since it's not a game and it might dominate rankings essentially providing free advertising. It could be placed in a utility or entertainment category. Despite Apple previously saying the opposite, I don't think Apple should allow games in the games category that are just a thin wrapper around single-game streaming. Fortunately Microsoft opted not to do this. The games category should be for native games only.
Apple should do whatever it takes to avoid streaming video services from sending you to a web page even if it means not taking more than a transaction fee. This burns good will from consumers that are increasingly aware that Apple is requiring this. It may be considered rent-seeking since Apple offers a first-party service that doesn't require fees although this is fuzzy since the actual content content is typically different. It is not commonplace to charge these fees on non-phone platforms and the medium is non-platform content.
Apple isn’t rent-seeking. They built and maintain the platform. They created a low-risk App Store that encourages customers to purchase apps, because they’ve been vetted for stability, security and compliance with UI standards. Purchases and subscriptions are low risk because it’s easy to delete apps and cancel subscriptions, no questions asked. Apple literally invented this paradigm for purchasing software.
These attributes deliver customers who would not otherwise exist. That is the exact opposite of rent-seeking.
Well said. The Apple App Store is just as much Apples IP as it’s IOS or M1 Soc processor
One of the main things that Apple does with the money that it gets from the "15% or 30% commissions" is to provide all the same App Store services and tools to all the developers who are charging NOTHING for their software and therefore Apple gets NO PERCENTAGE from them because they charge nothing.
The 15% fee acts as a subsidy to all the developers who charge NOTHING and pay NOTHING to Apple for all the services that they get.
If Apple were to drop the fee for all software to, let's say 3%, then it would have to stop subsidizing and start CHARGING all the developers of all those free software items a FEE for every single copy of software that these developers distribute to the public. So if the fee were $1 for each copy of software sent out for free, it would be a death knell for those developers because they would owe Apple $1,000,000 if customers downloaded their "free software" one million times.
In all the years that this topic has existed, I have never heard a single person say that Apple has no right to charge a fee for developers of free software on Apple's App Store.
If Tim Sweeney would argue that Apple can and should charge developers for each piece of software that they distributed for no charge, and for each iCloud service that those free software products use, then I would consider that a noble argument. But he doesn't want that. Basically, Tim Sweeney doesn't want his popular software products to be subsidizing all the free software on the App Store. But he's not admitting that this is the truth.
Many don’t know this,Tim Sweeney and Epic is largely owned by Tencent China, a Chinese communist controlled company
So this is Chinese communists vs an American company that just came up technology to save people trapped in the wild without mobile service
chinese Communist controlled Epic games… let that sink in
This has no relevance to his argument about anti-competitive behavior by Apple. It's just an ad hominem.
It absolutely does. Can you guarantee with your life that the owners of his company, Chinese communists have nothing to do with his lawsuit and his fringe arguments?
how about you stop being anti competitive and let me live at your house you built and also use your oven and wife?
of course I am being extreme but that is what this Chinese communist agent Sweeney’s argument boils down to
Isn’t it more like Railroad companies blocking competitors from driving their own trains and selling tickets on the Railroad companies tracks? That being said I kinda wish Epic would give up, I wanna play Fortnite again.
Well if the railroads were built and owned privately by railroad company A, why would they need to let rail company B use it for free or dictate any rules?
Should your ISP be able to decide what websites or online services you can use?
Do you tell you ISP how much you feel you should pay for their services?
Also, Apple is not telling what games or services Epic can sell but only they must follow store rules and fees if they chose to use Apples store.
Isn’t it more like Railroad companies blocking competitors from driving their own trains and selling tickets on the Railroad companies tracks? That being said I kinda wish Epic would give up, I wanna play Fortnite again.
Well if the railroads were built and owned privately by railroad company A, why would they need to let rail company B use it for free or dictate any rules?
Should your ISP be able to decide what websites or online services you can use?
Your ISP have every right to block you from visiting certain websites that violate their content policy.
>ISPs therefore retain their First Amendment rights to enforce their
policies and block content. Every ISP, for instance, has an acceptable
use policy for consumers like AT&T’s,
which says it reserves the right to pull down content that is “obscene,
indecent, hateful, malicious, racist, defamatory, fraudulent, libelous,
treasonous, excessively violent or promoting the use of violence or
otherwise harmful to others.”<
This is why VPN are so popular. A good VPN will block your ISP from seeing the websites you visit.
Your argument is totally irrelevant. One pays for an ISP and expect a certain amount of service. Can you walk into a Starbucks, log on to their free WiFi and then complain that you can't stream from a website that streams pirated music?
Here, Sweeney wants access to iOS without having to pay for it. His claim is that Apple have a "monopoly" with iOS and it's a violation of anti-trust laws to block anyone from having access to iOS, in order to profit from. And since Apple makes more than enough profit from selling their hardware to fund the development of iOS, Apple is abusing the "monopoly" power they have with iOS, by charging a 30% commission on sales made using iOS.
On the other hand, Sweeney have no problem paying the 30% commission on Microsoft Xbox because Microsoft claim that they make very little profit selling Xbox hardware. So he thinks Microsoft is entitled to charge a 30% commission of Xbox game apps, in order to support and profit from their Xbox platform. Even though Microsoft have the same "monopoly" with their Xbox platform, as Apple have with iOS.
You seem to forget or just don't understand, that the reason why Epic is blocked from the Apple App Store, is that they deliberately violated Apple App Store policies. Before that, Epic had a very popular Fortnite game app in the Apple App Store, that Apple hosted for free and Epic was using to make 10's of million of dollars from, every month.
Many don’t know this,Tim Sweeney and Epic is largely owned by Tencent China, a Chinese communist controlled company
So this is Chinese communists vs an American company that just came up technology to save people trapped in the wild without mobile service
chinese Communist controlled Epic games… let that sink in
This has no relevance to his argument about anti-competitive behavior by Apple. It's just an ad hominem.
It absolutely does. Can you guarantee with your life that the owners of his company, Chinese communists have nothing to do with his lawsuit and his fringe arguments?
how about you stop being anti competitive and let me live at your house you built and also use your oven and wife?
of course I am being extreme but that is what this Chinese communist agent Sweeney’s argument boils down to
The number of logical fallacies and bad faith arguments you're making is appalling.
I have no need to guarantee anything with my life. Apple's behavior is classic anti-competitive behavior. There is an effective duopoly in the mobile space by Apple and Google, and both companies engage in rent seeking. The EU is ahead of the US on reining them in, but the US will eventually move.
Your argument regarding my home is nonsense. My home is private property. Within legal limits, I can decide how I want to use it.
And again, there is no evidence that Sweeny is a "Chinese communist agent". Your behavior is racist and xenophobic.
Isn’t it more like Railroad companies blocking competitors from driving their own trains and selling tickets on the Railroad companies tracks? That being said I kinda wish Epic would give up, I wanna play Fortnite again.
Well if the railroads were built and owned privately by railroad company A, why would they need to let rail company B use it for free or dictate any rules?
Should your ISP be able to decide what websites or online services you can use?
Do you tell you ISP how much you feel you should pay for their services?
Also, Apple is not telling what games or services Epic can sell but only they must follow store rules and fees if they chose to use Apples store.
I am free to change ISPs if I don't like their behavior or price. Although in the US, we have limited ISP choice. There is anti-competitive behavior in the ISP market, but that's a discussion for another thread.
On the other hand, Sweeney have no problem paying the 30% commission on Microsoft Xbox because Microsoft claim that they make very little profit selling Xbox hardware. So he thinks Microsoft is entitled to charge a 30% commission of Xbox game apps, in order to support and profit from their Xbox platform. Even though Microsoft have the same "monopoly" with their Xbox platform, as Apple have with iOS.
Epic doesn’t have to sell in Apples App Store. The store did t exist before Apple spent billions over last 15 years developing it.
But Apple won't let competing app stores on iOS. That is what Epic claims is illegal.
So if you sell your salted peanuts at Safeway, on the shelves. and now you decided you want to go against Safeway rules and build a store in aisle 7 with you own cashier and not pay Safeway
do you think Safeway goes for that?
but if you go outside of Safeway and lease you own space and build yiu store and pull your stuff out of Safeway, I am pretty sure Safeway would not have an issue
again Sweeney is an agent of communist China, that is just as bad as Putin, so there is no need to even discuss them as actual human beings
Epic doesn’t have to sell in Apples App Store. The store did t exist before Apple spent billions over last 15 years developing it.
But Apple won't let competing app stores on iOS. That is what Epic claims is illegal.
So if you sell your salted peanuts at Safeway, on the shelves. and now you decided you want to go against Safeway rules and build a store in aisle 7 with you own cashier and not pay Safeway
do you think Safeway goes for that?
but if you go outside of Safeway and lease you own space and build yiu store and pull your stuff out of Safeway, I am pretty sure Safeway would not have an issue
again Sweeney is an agent of communist China, that is just as bad as Putin, so there is no need to even discuss them as actual human beings
This is the last time I'm going to waste my evening responsing to your racist garbage.
My iOS devices are my property. I cannot choose to install apps outside of the App Store. I do not have choice. Apple actively prohibits third party payment mechanisms or app distribution channels. So in your analogy that's like Safeway prohibiting me from opening up my own store elsewhere in town. Apple's behavior is illegal and must be stopped.
On the other hand, Sweeney have no problem paying the 30% commission on Microsoft Xbox because Microsoft claim that they make very little profit selling Xbox hardware. So he thinks Microsoft is entitled to charge a 30% commission of Xbox game apps, in order to support and profit from their Xbox platform. Even though Microsoft have the same "monopoly" with their Xbox platform, as Apple have with iOS.
And where in your link does it state that Sweeney have a problem with paying Microsoft their 30% commission? Sure Sweeney would like to cut into that 30% commission on every platform. Buy why only Apple and Google being sued by Epic Games for their 30% commission?
Here are the numbers for just Fortnite.
Percent of total revenue generated from 2018 to 2020
from PlayStation - 46.8%
from Xbox- 27.5%
from PC - 9.6%
from Switch- 8.4%
from iOS- 7%
Epic paid in commission ...
$237M to Apple from 2017 to2020 (that's for 3 years worth of sales)
$246M to Microsoft for 2020 alone
$451M to Sony for 2020 alone
Epic generated $700M in Fortnite revenue from iOS, before they were banned.
So why haven't Epic sued Microsoft and Sony for their 30% commission? Xbox and PlayStation game consoles account for over 70% of Fortnite revenue. Mobile platforms, less than 10%. Could it be that Sweeney is OK with paying Microsoft and Sony the same 30% he's bitching about paying Apple?
Comments
no business has a right to Apples IP or it’s customers without following Apples rules
especially not some Chinese commie garbage company like Epic
railroads? I live about 8 blocks from Union Pacific Railroad Headquarter, maybe Sweeney can go in there and tell them how it’s done too?
The 15% fee acts as a subsidy to all the developers who charge NOTHING and pay NOTHING to Apple for all the services that they get.
If Apple were to drop the fee for all software to, let's say 3%, then it would have to stop subsidizing and start CHARGING all the developers of all those free software items a FEE for every single copy of software that these developers distribute to the public. So if the fee were $1 for each copy of software sent out for free, it would be a death knell for those developers because they would owe Apple $1,000,000 if customers downloaded their "free software" one million times.
In all the years that this topic has existed, I have never heard a single person say that Apple has no right to charge a fee for developers of free software on Apple's App Store.
If Tim Sweeney would argue that Apple can and should charge developers for each piece of software that they distributed for no charge, and for each iCloud service that those free software products use, then I would consider that a noble argument. But he doesn't want that. Basically, Tim Sweeney doesn't want his popular software products to be subsidizing all the free software on the App Store. But he's not admitting that this is the truth.
how about you stop being anti competitive and let me live at your house you built and also use your oven and wife?
of course I am being extreme but that is what this Chinese communist agent Sweeney’s argument boils down to
Also, Apple is not telling what games or services Epic can sell but only they must follow store rules and fees if they chose to use Apples store.
I have no need to guarantee anything with my life. Apple's behavior is classic anti-competitive behavior. There is an effective duopoly in the mobile space by Apple and Google, and both companies engage in rent seeking. The EU is ahead of the US on reining them in, but the US will eventually move.
Your argument regarding my home is nonsense. My home is private property. Within legal limits, I can decide how I want to use it.
And again, there is no evidence that Sweeny is a "Chinese communist agent". Your behavior is racist and xenophobic.
do you think Safeway goes for that?
but if you go outside of Safeway and lease you own space and build yiu store and pull your stuff out of Safeway, I am pretty sure Safeway would not have an issue
again Sweeney is an agent of communist China, that is just as bad as Putin, so there is no need to even discuss them as actual human beings
My iOS devices are my property. I cannot choose to install apps outside of the App Store. I do not have choice. Apple actively prohibits third party payment mechanisms or app distribution channels. So in your analogy that's like Safeway prohibiting me from opening up my own store elsewhere in town. Apple's behavior is illegal and must be stopped.