undefined | Better HN

0 pointsspiffytech4y ago0 comments

> Apple seems to maintain the expectation that they deserve 30% of revenue from massive corporations like Netflix, Amazon, etc.

That's exactly what Apple believes.

From Tim Cook's testimony in Epic v. Apple, from Ars Technica:

> The in-app-purchasing (IAP) system itself, Cook said, is simply the most efficient way of collecting a 15 to 30 percent commission on each in-app sale. "If not for IAP, we’d have to come up with another system to invoice developers. It would be a mess."

This view is explicitly affirmed in the Epic v. Apple verdict[1]:

> Under all models, Apple would be entitled to a commission or licensing fee, even if IAP was optional.

The court found the 30% rate arbitrary but not objectionable[2]:

> Indeed, while the Court finds no basis for the specific rate chosen by Apple (i.e., the 30% rate) based on the record, the Court still concludes that Apple is entitled to some compensation for use of its intellectual property.

Personally, I don't approve of Apple feeling entitled to a cut of commerce that doesn't hit their app store, but the court's take (before appeals) is that it's perfectly legal.

[0]: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/05/ceo-tim-cook-faces-po...

[1]: Page 67, https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21060631/apple-epic-j...

[2]: Page 150

0 comments

4 comments · 1 top-level

Retric4y ago· 3 in thread

Yea, legally it’s clear Apple can charge whatever they want. The actual leverage large companies have is by not having their Apps on iOS Apple may lose customers.

But at this point I doubt Netflix is willing to risk it as there is simply to many streaming options. However, Netflix doesn’t need to use IAP so for them it’s a question of increased conversions with IAP rather than dropping the platform. Assuming their also saving a little on CC processing fees a 15% cut is probably a reasonable deal for increasing the number of Netflix customers and quite a bit of revenue for Apple.

Wowfunhappy4y ago

> But at this point I doubt Netflix is willing to risk it as there is simply to many streaming options.

Well, but as you point out, they aren't using IAP at the moment so there's nothing to risk.

An interesting question is what would happen if Apple decided to play hardball and demand Netflix use IAP again, with no external option, similar to what is required for video games. Honestly, my money would be on Netflix pulling out of iOS.

chipotle_coyote4y ago

If I'm understanding the outcome of the Epic case that these documents came to light from, that kind of hardball would probably go pretty poorly. While Apple mostly won the case, between this and a case in South Korea, it's pretty clear they're going to be required to allow some kind of linking for external account management of "reader apps," which they classify Netflix as.

Personally, I suspect if Apple had not gone the ridiculously overreaching "we want a cut of every purchase of digital goods/services when the purchase occurs in any app on iOS" route, and had let Netflix and Amazon and anyone doing "reader apps" at least link out from the very beginning (and more reasonably, allow them to -- gasp! -- load a web view to purchase/manage subscriptions, buy ebooks, etc.), it would have saved an awful lot of heartache.

Well, that and just go with a 15% cut across the board rather than 30%.

Well, all of that and also include at least streaming game services in their quirky definition of "reader apps".

1 more reply

smoldesu4y ago

Moreover, Netflix is an app that would work perfectly fine in the browser. Netflix was providing a native app as a courtesy to the customer, not the other way around. Most Netflix subscribers I know would probably shake their fist at Apple and God and then go back to binging Friends in Safari.

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse