I've been saying this for years now: this is why Apple should've ushered in lower commissions on larger publishers themselves because otherwise a court, a regulatory authority or a legislature was ultimately going to do it for them.
And you're almost always better off making that change yourself.
Big publishers have their own payment processing pipelines. Apple's is just extra overhead. Smaller publishers still (IMHO) can see a lot of benefit from Apple's 30% cut. It's those large publishers who are most likely to challenge your rules in court or lobby against you.
If the very largest publishers were paying 10% as a Preferred Partner instead of 30%, they would be a lot less willing to challenge the status quo when they might lose that privilege.
We've already have ridiculous workarounds for Apple's policies here like how you can bypass it to buy directly from Amazon through the app for physical goods. The carve out for digital goods is and was always a tortured post facto justification.
Where once the 30% cut funded the App Store (when it was small). It's clearly transitioned to being a massive profit center and Apple executives couldn't see past the short term revenue to see the writing on the wall. Woops.
I agree. It also allows the judge to slap them without agreeing with the other side. Epic didn't get anything they really wanted. This change will not make much difference. No change to single app store model. As far as I can tell, Apple will have to allow communication in the app about payment through other means. That's it. I think it is likely that Apple will require apps to offer Apple payment as an option alongside the new communication about an external payment system. That is just a guess on my part, but it wouldn't be surprising.
If I guessed right, Apple's income probably won't go down much. I would rather use Apple payment system. Lots of other people will also. It is simple and allows me one-stop management of subscriptions and purchases. Some folks won't of course, but it is the easiest choice.
> I would rather use Apple payment system. Lots of other people will also
You might be in this mindset because up until now almost only apps that nicely fit Apple’s rules have stayed in the AppStore. I hope this ruling and subsequent changes will being in more services that made no sense before but can at last come into the AppStore with their payment system.
I see this ruling as basically Apple forced to give everyone the same position that Netflix had to bargain hard. I actually hope this will be positive for Apple, with more activity, better user experience for their platform.
The price would be higher if you used Apple payment system. That is how companies would get consumers to be enticed to use other payment systems.
That is what Epic did with their V-bucks: either use Apple system at the usual cost, or use Epic payment system at a permanently decreased cost (20% cheaper in August 2020).
The ruling has no comment on Apple contractually limiting devs to charging the same price, so it is not at all clear that the price will be lower. These kinds of contracts are quite common in many retail sectors, so it wouldn't be unusual. Apple App store is still the only way to get on the platform. Devs will get a bigger cut.
The quote from the injunction is that apps may now provide "external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to In-App Purchasing."
They will simply force developers to only put payment options at the last step of the checkout process, which prevents any discount offer for one certain payment system
Sure; you also "risk" the regulating authority deciding it's no longer an issue. Best case, you get to frame the solution; worst case you get the same outcome, the regulator deciding, BUT with you having demonstrated willingness to address the issue.
The only reason to defend yourself is if you legitimately think what you're doing is defensible.
And you're almost always better off making that change yourself.
Big publishers have their own payment processing pipelines. Apple's is just extra overhead. Smaller publishers still (IMHO) can see a lot of benefit from Apple's 30% cut. It's those large publishers who are most likely to challenge your rules in court or lobby against you.
If the very largest publishers were paying 10% as a Preferred Partner instead of 30%, they would be a lot less willing to challenge the status quo when they might lose that privilege.
We've already have ridiculous workarounds for Apple's policies here like how you can bypass it to buy directly from Amazon through the app for physical goods. The carve out for digital goods is and was always a tortured post facto justification.
Where once the 30% cut funded the App Store (when it was small). It's clearly transitioned to being a massive profit center and Apple executives couldn't see past the short term revenue to see the writing on the wall. Woops.