Developers interested in distributing iOS apps on their websites also have to cross a high bar. This includes being registered or incorporated in the EU, being a member of “good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more,” and having an app that received “more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year.”
Apple will also vet the apps, which must receive official “notarization” from the company, before they can distributed on third-party platforms.
Developers must pay a 17% or 10% commission, and fork over “€0.50 for each first annual install” if their app crosses one million total installs over a 12-month period.
Critics have since slammed the new fee structure, calling it anticompetitive. “This is extortion, plain and simple,” Spotify said in January. “For any developer wondering if this might work for you, you need to have less than a million customers and essentially sign up for not growing in the long run.”
I really hope the EU doesn’t find this “compliance” good enough - it’s absolutely not free sideloading of apps like on Android, or any PC ever. It’s pretty much the App Store, but with a smaller fee for a while and with Apple wasting less money on server costs.
I’m sure they don’t. Had they just gone with the “we can block your app for security reasons and want to see it first”, they might have. But requiring long term active developer accounts (which has a yearly fee), preapproval, commission, payment per download etc, that isn’t allowing sideloading at all, it’s just an Apple app store in a trenchcoat.
Queue years of lawsuits until they actually comply with EU law.
I’m hoping for billions in fines.
I hope all Erasmus trips in the next year are funded by Apple
I’m hoping apple just isn’t allowed to do business in the EU, then their company fails
So they want developers to pay for the privilege of paying for their app’s download hosting?
I really hope someone in the EU is getting as pissed at this as I am.
Did they really just pull a Unity move with charging per download??
This is not going to be good for any developers that sit in that danger zone of offering a free app with in-app purchases. If they don’t make enough money (over €500k) once they hit that 1 million download threshold… they could owe more money than they make.
Edit: Looks like the first million downloads are always free for that year, but anything after that and they start charging per download. Still bad for free apps if they grow a lot without getting much income from their users.
If Apple can revoke or have whatever last word on what these third-party stores can publish then it’s just a walled garden with more steps involved, especially if third party stores need to pay a commission while doing all the hard work.
I hope EU tear them a new one.
What can we do to get those rules to apply in the USA?
Join the EU.
cries in British
Ouch.
Remove corporate sponsored members of Parliament.
You’re under the impression that the US has a parliament? We don’t
You and everyone here understood perfectly what I meant. Get out of here with your inferior presidential system.
Pfft ok. You could’ve just said “I meant Congress” but instead you confusingly pushed back
Yeah I agree pretty confusing - talk about moving the goal posts.
Having said that, I do think dustyData highlighted the two defining flaws in the US government:
Money has too much influence over politicians. Many other countries have laws that limit how much funding a politician can receive from the private sector. Some countries that don’t have those limits are adopting them.
The critical difference between “Congress” and “Parliament” is the separation between Congress and the President does not exist under a typical parliamentary system. Under that system the Prime Minister is just the person parliament voted to be in charge and make individual decisions where you can’t afford to wait for hundreds of people to get involved. I think your presidential system is the reason your government can’t pass any laws lately.
It’s quite rare for a parliamentary government to struggle to pass laws - it does happen, because there are checks and balances, but it tends to be more functional than the current US government. Under a parliamentary system, if the parliament isn’t happy with the prime minister… they just vote to kick them out and put someone new in charge. They don’t shut down the government by refusing to let anything get done until the next election (which might leave everyone in the same position).
The US is right now in a self consuming death spiral, that will only stop when politics stops being like football
Which football?
I’m European, so actual football. The other one works too tho. What matters is the dynamic of “my team is always right, the other is always wrong, I’ll punch you in the face for it”
my team is always right, the other is always wrong
Um… that’s a perfect example of why you need to avoid cultural references when use analogies.
When you said “like football” I thought you meant “any time you face a challenge, pass the ball to someone else”. Where I come from, that’s what “like football” means. And it’s not necessarily a negative thing, maybe the new person with the ball won’t struggle with the same challenge… and when they inevitably face a challenge of their own they might pass the ball back to you… with your original challenge now long gone.
I still wouldn’t bet against America. As a Tottenham fan, I have bet against Chelsea many times based on pure and justified loathing and ended up sad until American sports come on TV.
Which is related to parliament because…?
Because there is a parliament. A very disfunctional one
Just because the concept is similar doesn’t make a bicameral legislature the same thing. Maybe don’t be so confident about something you clearly know little about?
So they’re not allowing downloads from third party sites, they’re making a distributed CDN.
All of this is pointless until they stop requiring “notarization”.
I believe it’s spelled “extortion”
