It's the same with the DMA where revenue and stock market value is important criteria.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Tweaks EU Core Technology Fee to Avoid Bankrupting Unexpectedly Viral Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's the same with the DMA where revenue and stock market value is important criteria.
Malicious compliance. Still don’t understand how they can charge this in the first place…
Imagine building an item, selling it wherever you want and expecting the components of that item to be given to you for free.
What about developers whose apps would have been free, but chose to charge a small fee to offset and pay the core technology fee.
Well yes as I do that all the time when I want to run older versions of an app, apps no longer on the store or test if an app is worth purchasing.
Essentially you just “inject” the app with your signature and it thinks you own it. Such as Cydia impactor.
You can do this with a free developer account with 3 apps, for 7 days or you can pay 99$ a year for an unlimited amount. Or just purchase a slot in a volume developer license for a fraction of the cost, with the same functionality but a small chance the developer ID might be blacklisted after a year and you would need to purchase a new slot again.
Well that’s the easy part then considering civil law doesn’t rely on court precedent but on codified law and statutes, and legal precedence is mostly limited to the CJEU rulings.
and EU law supersedes national law.
Subject: Software Included in Sale of Tangible Goods: Classification as Goods under EU Law
In accordance with the established jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the legislative framework of the European Union, it is contended that software included as part of the sale of tangible goods, such as mobile smartphones or computers, should be regarded as a ‘sale of goods’.
The teleological interpretation of EU law, as applied to the sale of hardware inclusive of software, leads to the understanding that such a transaction is a transfer of ownership of both the hardware and the software.
This understanding is in harmony with the EU’s commitment to a single digital market that respects the rights of consumers and the integrity of transactions involving digital goods.
Any post-purchase license agreement that seeks to undermine this transfer is legally tenuous and may be deemed invalid if not agreed upon before the completion of the sale.
Yea imagine selling a product and the mafia comes for a shakedown. For all the services they provide for you that you also just happen to not use at all. Sounds absolutely fair.
My country indeed chose to join. But back in 2005 we voted against the European constitution (which gives the EU rights to do idiotic legislation like this) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Dutch_European_Constitution_referendum ) but in the end our government chose not to listen to the citzins and greenlit this constitution anyway.
And basically any referendum we had in the past 20 years our dear "democatic" government chose to ignore entirely. And chosing to leave the EU, even if there was a referendum for it, would also be ignored by them. So really, I don't have any choice.
Initially I disagreed with you.. you'd own the hardware and not the software. But....... I feel like I own my MacBook more than I do my iPhone. If I wanted to stop using macOS now and keep using the computer I paid ££££ for, I could just never boot into it and I have the choice of Windows and Linux. Not so much the case with my iPhone...
And the EU constitution never got passed by the way. And a constitution would have granted us more uniformal protections as it intended to create a consolidated constitution for the European Union(EU). It would have replaced the existing European Union treaties with a single text, given legal force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and expanded qualified majority voting into policy areas which had previously been decided by unanimity among member states.
Uh Hu, any actual proof of that? You have a parliamentary democracy. You have all the choices, just how the Uk left, You’re just in the vast minority.
This is really all beside the point here, but you started this particular complaint way back with how the EU was forcing you to live by their rule.
Without making any judgement on their merit, at best it seems like your grievances lie with your own government more than anything.
Yes. And until iOS that was never a thing. Windows, MacOS, Linux, Unix, etc etc etc.
I don’t believe that you believe that this is genuinely an option.
They are not saying that. But the exact same thing happened with railroads, oil companies, telecoms, etc.
They built critical infrastructure. Capitalism is not self regulating when the product is critical and has a monopoly. This is the purpose of government.
And, even in the areas where it kinda clear, they can apparently go back and say, “No, though the text hasn’t changed we meant this. And, where we provided actual values for determining gatekeeper status? Those numbers were just for decoration, not for actually letting anyone know what a gatekeeper is. BTW, we can’t wait for you to release the Apple Vision Pro in the region because since you will command 100% of the Apple Vision Pro marketshare with the first one sold, that’s going to be a gatekeeper, too.”
In that analogy, Apple literally sourced the ingredients, hired the chefs, built the storefront, hired the customer service folks, designed the logistics and shipped and stocked the shop with cakes. And, the EU had full knowledge of everything they were doing every step of the way and signed off on it.
And then they sold the cake to the customer.
Apple insisting the cake isn’t sold but rented
And that almost always ends up being worse for the consumer. And that's also not entirely true here in the Netherlands. For exmaple the government owns the company that services the railroads (ProRail) and they own 100% shares of the biggest transport company (NS), but there are other companies that are privately owned who operate on those railroads.
Also the government doesn't own Oil companies here or telecom. We do have water management which is on it's own a government like solution. (and even democratic with elections and all)
But they also overregulate things, which in the end stifles innovation. And costs millions upon millions of tax-payers money. For example the national police has been updating (or failing to-) their systems since the late 90s up until today.
If we would have government controlled operating systems since the beginning we would by now still be using Windows 3.11. And I'm not even exaggerating that.
And honestly every time the government does stuff like this is always because of "competition", "reduced cost" or "user choice". But EVERY time there is less (or no) competition afterward, prices go only up and alarmingly fast and the users don't have additional choice.
Last edited:
I actually don't see a big difference with the US there, practically speaking.
Government in US doesn’t own any of those industries. But they do regulate them, sort of. Whether what the companies do on their own or the government mandates is good for consumers is a crap shoot either way. It's not really about the consumers anyway except as a source of money (and maybe votes) for both private industry and government.
All I'm saying is that we can't trust either government or private industry to do what's right on their own. Like this with Apple trying every which way to charge rent for its operating system.
Apple will stifle innovation in its way, government will stifle innovation another way. Honestly I don’t like the idea of government micromanaging private industries either, but Apple has had ample opportunity to cut a lot of this criticism off many years ago, and completely failed to do anything about it.
How is it smart or reasonable? What apple is doing is basically telling developers "Well if you want the EU rules to apply in your particular case, you'll have to pay us .50€, otherwise go F yourself."
Can't wait for EU commission declare this model to be in breach of EU anti-trust rules, which would mean that any developer, who had to pay even 50cents to Apple, will be liable for damages + interests.
And hopefully Apple gets slammed on its face by 10% revenue fine, it's about damn time EU shows these corporations to stop effing around.
Here's the thing I'd like someone to help answer (or point out my ignorance): Android already allows for 3rd Party (or Alt) stores, 3rd party payments, 3rd party in App payments, allows of the open use of the NFC chip, provides for direct side-loading (albeit with scare warning messages) -- Bottom line: Devs just flat out have more options for listing and selling their (free, freemium, or paid) apps and for keeping more of the revenue from those digital sales on Android. Moreover, freedom to to just use the handset hardware. And, far less arbitrary denials, not to mention options when denied.
... so why don't developers eat this up?
If I need make this even more clear: Apple's CTF should only push developers further away.
So why isn't Android the default and preferred development and sales platform. If not the only development platform for the majority of mobile applications?
Last edited:
All ask my previous post in a different way here: Apple would get crushed (and not by any legal, judicial, or governmental entity) if they decided, for example, that with the introduction of "Apple Silicon" they were going to migrate to only allowing software sales only though the Mac App store. Practically, no developer already uses the Mac App store. Apple Silicon would not drive software sales. Developers just won't put up with that kind of draconian control.
iPhone and the iOS App store (when it first launched) was probably OK - But, as soon as Android had established hardware sales well in excess of Apple (2013-2014) then I'd think most developers would want to prefer the far larger customer base, the obviously more open and less restrictive Android platform, as well as ability to dodge fees and increase revenue by making their own app store or utilizing a 3rd party one. Apps would migrate and customers would migrate because in general Android is just the far superior choice for not only apps, but hardware too.
So what is it that hinders Android development or sales, such that, developers put up with and continue to abide by iOS's (Apple's) draconian rules and control?
OOPS, excellent point, change all of that to “fake cakes” that they rent to companies that sell cakes (as display units).
The EU currently supports and upholds the practice of devices being licensed, not sold. Likely, so that companies will continue to sell products in the region. They’ll have to re-evaluate that at some point.