gatorguy said: Competition regulators tend to take the view that the relevant market is “iOS apps,” and here Apple has a 100% monopoly on their sale and distribution. Edge cases aside, there is no way for a developer to bring an iOS app to market without selling it through the App Store."
Who is saying this? Did they provide any legal judgements that would support a regulator in a particular country having that view? Law is about precedent. From what I've seen, there isn't much of a precedent worldwide for what Epic is claiming, i.e., an individual OS should be viewed as operating in a competitive vacuum.
EDIT: oh, it's from 9to5Mac's "antitrust guide"...no wonder it doesn't make much sense. That site has no clue what it's talking about per antitrust. For example, they treat Apple lowering the cut to 15% for developers making less than one million per year as if it's proof that the 30% cut represents something anticompetitive...which doesn't really make any sense considering 1) 30% still applies to companies making more than one million AND 2) Google made the same cut despite Android already allowing alternate stores.
Per another source there's a difference in what each side would like to claim as the marketplace:
"Apple argues that it does not have a dominant position in this market, as it considers the relevant market to be either “smartphones” or “apps.” Since the company holds a minority share of the smartphone market in most of the countries in which it operates, it believes it cannot be considered to have a dominant position.
Competition regulators tend to take the view that the relevant market is “iOS apps,” and here Apple has a 100% monopoly on their sale and distribution. Edge cases aside, there is no way for a developer to bring an iOS app to market without selling it through the App Store."
That perspective makes all the sense in the world and is the perspective I feel most anti competition bodies will be taking into account.
In its claims, Apple is simply skirting the core issue. You are not going to have any app store competition once you purchase an iPhone.
This restriction is not communicated to the buyer at any time prior to purchase and that is where I believe they will fall foul to anti competition investigations.
In a fog of emotional reactions and tunnel vision, this is the summary that clears the clouded view. Thank you.
gatorguy said: Why did Apple cut their rate, what do you think their impetus was? Something about it should be in the best interests of shareholders, and if revenues are reduced at all the there must be another potential benefit to Apple's business involved.
A combination of public relations and developer relations. Both of those are in the best interest of shareholders.
Per another source there's a difference in what each side would like to claim as the marketplace:
"Apple argues that it does not have a dominant position in this market, as it considers the relevant market to be either “smartphones” or “apps.” Since the company holds a minority share of the smartphone market in most of the countries in which it operates, it believes it cannot be considered to have a dominant position.
Competition regulators tend to take the view that the relevant market is “iOS apps,” and here Apple has a 100% monopoly on their sale and distribution. Edge cases aside, there is no way for a developer to bring an iOS app to market without selling it through the App Store."
This doesn't respond well to a bricks-and-mortar store or mall analogy. I can't think of any store, mall or even flea market that would respond well if I were to waltz into their store, mall or flea market and set up a kiosk to sell my wares without paying the store, mall or flea market operator a cut of the profit or a rental fee. If anything, the app store is most like a consignment shop. The shop owner covers the overhead and handles sales transactions, only taking a cut from those transactions. I can't even think of a consignment shop that would also go so far as to provide a space for people to give away things for free, including things that will lead to revenue outside of the shop's control. There's no monopoly in any of this.
Note the fourth item in this list:
The CCA (Australian Competition and Consumer Act) :
prohibits cartels and anti-competitive conduct such as concerted practices and abuses of market power
provides for private damages actions for anti-competitive conduct on a ‘single damages’ basis
imposes personal liability for individuals, such as executives and management personnel knowingly involved in cartel conduct
imposes access obligations on monopoly infrastructure owners, which allows others to access and use that infrastructure in certain circumstances
prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct, as well as unconscionable conduct, in commercial and consumer transactions
prohibits unfair terms in contracts involving small businesses and consumers
sets out statutory guarantees related to the safety and quality of goods and services in consumer contracts
establishes a strict liability regime for manufacturers that produce defective goods.
So now it would depend on how the Australian competition authorities look at Apple's iOS infrastructure and whether it operates in a monopoly position, and if so whether it allows for sufficient competition. I'm certainly not qualified to make that decision, nor are you in all probability. Just guessing, but I personally believe the relevant market will be determined as 'iOS ecosystem". Apple obviously recognizes that a distinctly possible outcome too, as will Google..
You're right, I'm certainly not an expert in Australian law. Nonetheless, it's nonsensical to ignore competitive platforms, say that the relevant market is just "the iOS ecosystem" and therefore declare it to be a monopoly. The bricks-and-mortar parallel isn't just rhetoric. If the app store represents an internal monopoly, how would anyone differentiate that from the same monopoly operation currently carried out inside every store and mall in the world? Those businesses have complete control over who gets to do business on their platform and on what terms those vendors are allowed in. If the terms are untenable, competition down the road (with the exact same control over vendors) will get all the good vendors and take all the customers. For that matter, a side-road strip mall that only attracts second-tier vendors can't claim that the better-located, better managed mall has a monopoly just because they're able to attract a more lucrative customer base. That's not how any of this works. If Australian courts declare the iOS ecosystem to be a monopoly, if I were Apple, I would immediately insist on the right to establish pop-up Apple Stores inside various retail stores and malls throughout Australia, rent and commission-free. It's the same thing.
But - and I have said this about 20 times here, what you and others regularly and intentionally neglect to consider is that the competition regulators don't see the entire app market as the relevant market - because it's not, due to brand lock-ins. Once someone has spent £1000 on an iPhone, they have no option but to use the App Store. They can't "just switch to Android", that would involve another £££ for an Android phone, plus purchasing all the apps and services again, and replacing HomePods, AppleTVs etc with their non-Apple equivalents. Therefore, the market is defined as apps that work on iOS, and that market is just the Apple App Store. If you could use iOS apps on Android, and the AppleTV etc with Android phones without financial cost then the market would be bigger and there would likely be no investigation.
Trying to compare with a mall is a faulty comparison, because customers can go to any shop within any mall with no financial penalty for not sticking with the same store. Products purchased at Best Buy will work with power outlets from Home Depot. If the products at Best Buy aren't suitable or not sold for whatever reason, people can go elsewhere for the same product with no additional cost to use that item because the power outlets are all compatible. iOS has incompatible power outlets (APIs) to the competition, so without spending £££ to change all your power outlets (Apple devices) you have no choice but to buy all your apps from the App Store.
Per another source there's a difference in what each side would like to claim as the marketplace:
Competition regulators tend to take the view that the relevant market is “iOS apps,” and here Apple has a 100% monopoly on their sale and distribution.
The first sentence is downright stupid. There has never ever been any case where the relevant market is defined that narrowly. We might as well accuse BMW of monopolizing the relevant market called "Cars with BMW engines". Or closer to home, Microsoft is monopolizing the relevant market called "Xbox games".
They aren't, but you have inadvertently proven that there is no competition on iOS. If someone wants to buy a BMW and put an engine from Lexus in there (or more realistically tyres from Bridgestone rather than BMW), that's up to you, BMW won't stop you by remotely disabling the engine or tyres next time it updates. But Apple is trying its hardest to prevent iOS users from doing exactly that: buying apps elsewhere and running them on iOS. If people kept buying BMWs to put Lexus engines in, BMW would improve their own engines to compete. As is, Apple has no need to improve the App Store because they know no one else can compete on iOS.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
I'm an Apple fan and I truly hope Apple loses in some trivial jurisdiction like Australia so that Apple can shut down the iOS App Store for all users in Australia and tell all iOS users there that they have to purchase their apps as "web apps" in the future. There are now, and have never been, any restrictions on iOS users from getting web apps from anywhere or paying for them through any payment service, and with no surcharge by Apple.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
I'm an Apple fan and I truly hope Apple loses in some trivial jurisdiction like Australia so that Apple can shut down the iOS App Store for all users in Australia and tell all iOS users there that they have to purchase their apps as "web apps" in the future. There are now, and have never been, any restrictions on iOS users from getting web apps from anywhere or paying for them through any payment service, and with no surcharge by Apple.
It’s is why, if I can, I always go to the developers website to purchase an app to give them 100% of the cost.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
I'm an Apple fan and I truly hope Apple loses in some trivial jurisdiction like Australia so that Apple can shut down the iOS App Store for all users in Australia and tell all iOS users there that they have to purchase their apps as "web apps" in the future. There are now, and have never been, any restrictions on iOS users from getting web apps from anywhere or paying for them through any payment service, and with no surcharge by Apple.
It’s is why, if I can, I always go to the developers website to purchase an app to give them 100% of the cost.
I'm sure developers appreciate people like you. Does it tend to cost more to do that? Or less?
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
I'm an Apple fan and I truly hope Apple loses in some trivial jurisdiction like Australia so that Apple can shut down the iOS App Store for all users in Australia and tell all iOS users there that they have to purchase their apps as "web apps" in the future. There are now, and have never been, any restrictions on iOS users from getting web apps from anywhere or paying for them through any payment service, and with no surcharge by Apple.
No one would care if web apps were on the same level as native apps. They’re obviously not, otherwise the App Store would never have been created in the first place. Good luck getting a device to connect to an iPhone lightning accessory through Safari, use Bluetooth through Safari or use Metal in Safari too.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
Lies. Which makes you a liar. You have no proof that the "majority" of people disagree with me. I'd say the majority of trolls on AI don't agree with me, mainly because of years of making fools of them.
OTOH, I have actual proof that most people don't agree with Epic:
First off, the North Dakota vote. Epic and their bill were easily defeated 36-11. Seems like most of them agree with me. Today we find out the Arizona vote didn't even come up for discussion - it died on the vine (as it should have). I win again.
The most compelling proof is the Coalition for App Fairness. They've been around for 7 months and their Twitter account hasn't even hit 1,200 followers. Every single one of their tweets gets anywhere from 0-3 comments. Even the usual Apple trolls/haters stay away and can't be bothered to post. It's a wasteland. As to the Coalition itself - they haven't even hit 50 members yet. Of the hundreds of thousands of iOS developers only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of developers have bothered to sign up. How can you sit there and claim most people disagree with me (and Apple) when in the real world developers are avoiding Sweeney and his fellow whiners like the plague they are?
Sorry, but a bunch of trolls who are so ignorant/arrogant that they think they actually represent the majority of people are not a reliable source of how everyone thinks.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
Lies. Which makes you a liar. You have no proof that the "majority" of people disagree with me. I'd say the majority of trolls on AI don't agree with me, mainly because of years of making fools of them.
OTOH, I have actual proof that most people don't agree with Epic:
First off, the North Dakota vote. Epic and their bill were easily defeated 36-11. Seems like most of them agree with me. Today we find out the Arizona vote didn't even come up for discussion - it died on the vine (as it should have). I win again.
The most compelling proof is the Coalition for App Fairness. They've been around for 7 months and their Twitter account hasn't even hit 1,200 followers. Every single one of their tweets gets anywhere from 0-3 comments. Even the usual Apple trolls/haters stay away and can't be bothered to post. It's a wasteland. As to the Coalition itself - they haven't even hit 50 members yet. Of the hundreds of thousands of iOS developers only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of developers have bothered to sign up. How can you sit there and claim most people disagree with me (and Apple) when in the real world developers are avoiding Sweeney and his fellow whiners like the plague they are?
Sorry, but a bunch of trolls who are so ignorant/arrogant that they think they actually represent the majority of people are not a reliable source of how everyone thinks.
Nor do you represent nor know what the competition regulators think. Since you apparently label everyone you disagree with a “troll”, are the regulators to be labelled “trolls” if they decide Apple has a case to answer?
I have been here 5 years longer than you, so despite that you’re saying I’d be a member of an Apple forum for 15 years just to troll? You’re the troll for not engaging in discussion, just labelling people you don’t agree with. Go away, troll.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
Lies. Which makes you a liar. You have no proof that the "majority" of people disagree with me. I'd say the majority of trolls on AI don't agree with me, mainly because of years of making fools of them.
OTOH, I have actual proof that most people don't agree with Epic:
First off, the North Dakota vote. Epic and their bill were easily defeated 36-11. Seems like most of them agree with me. Today we find out the Arizona vote didn't even come up for discussion - it died on the vine (as it should have). I win again.
The most compelling proof is the Coalition for App Fairness. They've been around for 7 months and their Twitter account hasn't even hit 1,200 followers. Every single one of their tweets gets anywhere from 0-3 comments. Even the usual Apple trolls/haters stay away and can't be bothered to post. It's a wasteland. As to the Coalition itself - they haven't even hit 50 members yet. Of the hundreds of thousands of iOS developers only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of developers have bothered to sign up. How can you sit there and claim most people disagree with me (and Apple) when in the real world developers are avoiding Sweeney and his fellow whiners like the plague they are?
Sorry, but a bunch of trolls who are so ignorant/arrogant that they think they actually represent the majority of people are not a reliable source of how everyone thinks.
Nor do you represent nor know what the competition regulators think. Since you apparently label everyone you disagree with a “troll”, are the regulators to be labelled “trolls” if they decide Apple has a case to answer?
I have been here 5 years longer than you, so despite that you’re saying I’d be a member of an Apple forum for 15 years just to troll? You’re the troll for not engaging in discussion, just labelling people you don’t agree with. Go away, troll.
No, he usually tags them as liars. It's one of his favorite words and pretty much his MO. Ignore it. It just means he thinks you're important enough to respond to.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
Lies. Which makes you a liar. You have no proof that the "majority" of people disagree with me. I'd say the majority of trolls on AI don't agree with me, mainly because of years of making fools of them.
OTOH, I have actual proof that most people don't agree with Epic:
First off, the North Dakota vote. Epic and their bill were easily defeated 36-11. Seems like most of them agree with me. Today we find out the Arizona vote didn't even come up for discussion - it died on the vine (as it should have). I win again.
The most compelling proof is the Coalition for App Fairness. They've been around for 7 months and their Twitter account hasn't even hit 1,200 followers. Every single one of their tweets gets anywhere from 0-3 comments. Even the usual Apple trolls/haters stay away and can't be bothered to post. It's a wasteland. As to the Coalition itself - they haven't even hit 50 members yet. Of the hundreds of thousands of iOS developers only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of developers have bothered to sign up. How can you sit there and claim most people disagree with me (and Apple) when in the real world developers are avoiding Sweeney and his fellow whiners like the plague they are?
Sorry, but a bunch of trolls who are so ignorant/arrogant that they think they actually represent the majority of people are not a reliable source of how everyone thinks.
Nor do you represent nor know what the competition regulators think. Since you apparently label everyone you disagree with a “troll”, are the regulators to be labelled “trolls” if they decide Apple has a case to answer?
I have been here 5 years longer than you, so despite that you’re saying I’d be a member of an Apple forum for 15 years just to troll? You’re the troll for not engaging in discussion, just labelling people you don’t agree with. Go away, troll.
No, he usually tags them as liars. It's one of his favorite words and pretty much his MO. Ignore it. It just means he thinks you're important enough to respond to.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
I'm an Apple fan and I truly hope Apple loses in some trivial jurisdiction like Australia so that Apple can shut down the iOS App Store for all users in Australia and tell all iOS users there that they have to purchase their apps as "web apps" in the future. There are now, and have never been, any restrictions on iOS users from getting web apps from anywhere or paying for them through any payment service, and with no surcharge by Apple.
No one would care if web apps were on the same level as native apps. They’re obviously not, otherwise the App Store would never have been created in the first place. Good luck getting a device to connect to an iPhone lightning accessory through Safari, use Bluetooth through Safari or use Metal in Safari too.
That is entirely my point. And you didn't realize that was my point. If people in Australia were to get stuck with that situation, they would demand that the law be changed back to what it was. You don't grasp the concept of Apple fighting back by letting their customers in Australia suffer as a result of silly Australian laws.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Looks more as if you’re the bullshit post as the majority of people believe you’re wrong. Look anywhere else besides here about this subject, and even die hard Apple fans say is in the wrong. will eventually lose this war in the long run thankfully.
Lies. Which makes you a liar. You have no proof that the "majority" of people disagree with me. I'd say the majority of trolls on AI don't agree with me, mainly because of years of making fools of them.
OTOH, I have actual proof that most people don't agree with Epic:
First off, the North Dakota vote. Epic and their bill were easily defeated 36-11. Seems like most of them agree with me. Today we find out the Arizona vote didn't even come up for discussion - it died on the vine (as it should have). I win again.
The most compelling proof is the Coalition for App Fairness. They've been around for 7 months and their Twitter account hasn't even hit 1,200 followers. Every single one of their tweets gets anywhere from 0-3 comments. Even the usual Apple trolls/haters stay away and can't be bothered to post. It's a wasteland. As to the Coalition itself - they haven't even hit 50 members yet. Of the hundreds of thousands of iOS developers only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of developers have bothered to sign up. How can you sit there and claim most people disagree with me (and Apple) when in the real world developers are avoiding Sweeney and his fellow whiners like the plague they are?
Sorry, but a bunch of trolls who are so ignorant/arrogant that they think they actually represent the majority of people are not a reliable source of how everyone thinks.
You always resort to calling people names when you disagree with them. I actually feel sorry for you and people like you that have small fragile egos.
This isn’t your forum to control anymore. People can love Apple and Apple products, much like I do, and still call out Apple when they fail miserably or are on the wrong side. You, and a few other of your cohorts on here for some reason can’t have that. It’s ok. I forgive you and the others.
gatorguy said: Competition regulators tend to take the view that the relevant market is “iOS apps,” and here Apple has a 100% monopoly on their sale and distribution. Edge cases aside, there is no way for a developer to bring an iOS app to market without selling it through the App Store."
Who is saying this? Did they provide any legal judgements that would support a regulator in a particular country having that view? Law is about precedent. From what I've seen, there isn't much of a precedent worldwide for what Epic is claiming, i.e., an individual OS should be viewed as operating in a competitive vacuum.
EDIT: oh, it's from 9to5Mac's "antitrust guide"...no wonder it doesn't make much sense. That site has no clue what it's talking about per antitrust. For example, they treat Apple lowering the cut to 15% for developers making less than one million per year as if it's proof that the 30% cut represents something anticompetitive...which doesn't really make any sense considering 1) 30% still applies to companies making more than one million AND 2) Google made the same cut despite Android already allowing alternate stores.
The EU document is scary and makes me glad I don’t live there. Two simple (of many) issues:
1) “The conduct results in higher prices or worse quality for consumers”
the “or” should be an “and”. People should be able to choose quality/cost benefits.
2) “Consumers are not willing or able to switch to away from a dominant firm’s products”
the “willing or” should be stricken.
A casual read shows dozens of examples similar to the one above.
Actually the first point reads fine. The ‘or’ in this context implies “higher prices with all else held constant” or “worse quality with all else held constant.” Read like that it’s perfectly fair as a constraint against abuse of market position. Of course, Apple is innocent of either of these abuses.
Comments
1)
“The conduct results in higher prices or worse quality for consumers”
the “or” should be an “and”. People should be able to choose quality/cost benefits.
2)
“Consumers are not willing or able to switch to away from a dominant firm’s products”
the “willing or” should be stricken.
Trying to compare with a mall is a faulty comparison, because customers can go to any shop within any mall with no financial penalty for not sticking with the same store. Products purchased at Best Buy will work with power outlets from Home Depot. If the products at Best Buy aren't suitable or not sold for whatever reason, people can go elsewhere for the same product with no additional cost to use that item because the power outlets are all compatible. iOS has incompatible power outlets (APIs) to the competition, so without spending £££ to change all your power outlets (Apple devices) you have no choice but to buy all your apps from the App Store.
They aren't, but you have inadvertently proven that there is no competition on iOS. If someone wants to buy a BMW and put an engine from Lexus in there (or more realistically tyres from Bridgestone rather than BMW), that's up to you, BMW won't stop you by remotely disabling the engine or tyres next time it updates. But Apple is trying its hardest to prevent iOS users from doing exactly that: buying apps elsewhere and running them on iOS. If people kept buying BMWs to put Lexus engines in, BMW would improve their own engines to compete. As is, Apple has no need to improve the App Store because they know no one else can compete on iOS.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Lies. Which makes you a liar. You have no proof that the "majority" of people disagree with me. I'd say the majority of trolls on AI don't agree with me, mainly because of years of making fools of them.
OTOH, I have actual proof that most people don't agree with Epic:
First off, the North Dakota vote. Epic and their bill were easily defeated 36-11. Seems like most of them agree with me. Today we find out the Arizona vote didn't even come up for discussion - it died on the vine (as it should have). I win again.
The most compelling proof is the Coalition for App Fairness. They've been around for 7 months and their Twitter account hasn't even hit 1,200 followers. Every single one of their tweets gets anywhere from 0-3 comments. Even the usual Apple trolls/haters stay away and can't be bothered to post. It's a wasteland. As to the Coalition itself - they haven't even hit 50 members yet. Of the hundreds of thousands of iOS developers only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of developers have bothered to sign up. How can you sit there and claim most people disagree with me (and Apple) when in the real world developers are avoiding Sweeney and his fellow whiners like the plague they are?
Sorry, but a bunch of trolls who are so ignorant/arrogant that they think they actually represent the majority of people are not a reliable source of how everyone thinks.
this context implies “higher prices with all else held constant” or “worse quality with all else held constant.” Read like that it’s perfectly fair as a constraint against abuse of market position. Of course, Apple is innocent of either of these abuses.