Apple didn't do the referring, Netflix referred a customer from its own app to its own site.
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.
Meta, Microsoft, X and Match Join Epic Games in Protesting Fees for Non-App Store Purchase Links
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's a 15% cut for developer making less than $1M/year after year 2 (which is most) and 30% for the ones above.
The one thing that people neglect is the service Apple provides to developers. You can submit your app to virtually every country in the world and across multiple OS. Apple handles all international transactions, taxes, changing laws, billing, subscription cancellation and refunds just to name a few. And I'm not even mentioning all the new tools that they create and provide to app makers every year. There is literally no upfront money you have to put up to create an app, (which is a business).
I think a CTF for “Reader” apps like Netflix/Spotify makes sense.
I’m sure those companies would scream if it were imposed on them, but we shall see!
Nope. "First, and most significant, as discussed in the findings of facts, IAP is the method by which Apple collects its licensing fee from developers for the use of Apple’s intellectual property. Even in the absence of IAP, Apple could still charge a commission on developers. It would simply be more difficult for Apple to collect that commission."
Last edited:
I think it's only fair that Target now list the prices from all other stores for the products you are buying there.
This is just silly.
This is just silly.
From an app downloaded on an iOS device from the App Store — referral.
Netflix works in the browser on iPad OS, so I’m sure they could support Safari on iOS if they wanted to. But they choose the App Store because it’s a great way to get customers referred to your service!
Yet somehow they never wanted to subscribe until they had an iPhone and downloaded an app from the App Store that’s built with tech supplied by Apple!
Referral 😉
Apple taking a cut of non-App Store related purchases is ridiculous. But that's the only thing preventing some app from being offered for free on the App Store and then forcing customers to pay--either via DLC or subscription--to use the app. Download the Netflix app from the App Store for free. Apple gets nothing. Pay a subscription to Netflix under the rules Epic/Meta/MS wants. Apple gets nothing. Not fair to Apple. Apple taking a cut of Netflix's monthly subscriptions. Not fair to Netflix, because the customer only downloaded the app once from the App Store.
The compromise would be the developer has to sell the app for at the price of their highest priced subscription and/or download content. This is the best compromise. You know it's a good compromise when nobody is happy.😏😏😏
The compromise would be the developer has to sell the app for at the price of their highest priced subscription and/or download content. This is the best compromise. You know it's a good compromise when nobody is happy.😏😏😏
They might be doing it out of spite or they might be doing it because they are brining that new customer to the business. Just like you pay marketing companies to bring you customers or other similar types of ways that businesses acquire new customers.
Apple isn't forced to go through Best Buy and Netflix isn't forced to go through an app to get people to subscribe. They have made billions of dollars by getting users to subscribe through their website. They only pay $100-$400/year to Apple for a developer account. That's it. But millions of their users are watching Netflix content through an app on the iPad, iPhone and Apple TV.
It absolutely 100 percent is NOT a private company. I'm not sure what made you think this 🙄
This is already how it works. Given that the companies who want to link out aren't about to give up 25% of subscription revenue to Apple for the privilege of a link, the only thing Apple's new rule does is show that they can said to be complying with this court order.
Does Apple deserve compensation? Yes, but their current policies aren't getting them that compensation and are just getting them stuck in fights with regulators and developers.
Competition cures all ill’s. Somebody needs to make another tech platform that has better quality and more reasonable pricing. This will put these bloated companies in their place. Make it truly privacy focused and people will switch over night!
Why doesn’t Netflix build a web app?
We know they *could* but they chose an app on the App Store.
So it’s not the “only way” — it’s the way they chose, then they whine about the business decision they made.
You apparently don't realize how circular your logic is.
1. Apple forces devs to distribute iOS apps through the App Store
2. Dev adds link to their app leading to their website for customers to subscribe
3. Apple takes cut from transaction because (return to point 1)
When I say private company, I don't mean privately owned. I should've said they're a "capitalist" company, like any other company. They're free to make any business decisions they want as long as they're not anti competitive.
And this is entirely the point of the anti-steering ruling. The ruling was that companies should be allowed to communicate links to their customers. Whether Apple can charge for the privilege remains to be seen.
You apparently don’t understand that the open web option is there for Netflix to use.
They chose an app on the App Store.
Their business decision — they want it all for $99 per year.
Apple says fine, but no free ads in your app THAT YOU CHOSE TO BUILD.
Status quo for years — now Apple is forced to allow link out for *payment processing*, not to avoid commission.
So fine, you get a link, Apple gets commission. Don’t want to pay commission, don’t link.
Why should Apple allow freeloaders on the platform?
Because you apparently have to be worth over 20 billion dollars to join the club
Given the rest of the text in the ruling and surrounding justifications it seems to me that Apple should be collecting far more than they are trying to do with just the link out commission. A plain reading of the ruling suggests that Netflix should be paying Apple a commission to Apple regardless of how the user subscribed (whether through link out or just if they had an existing subscription and started using iOS APIs).
(However mea culpa - you are correct in that the ruling does say they can collect commission regardless)
Edit: Given the justifications the Judge gave for Apple's right to charge the commission it would imply that Apple should be charging all monetized apps a commission - I don't think carve outs fit into that logic. It is a "may charge a commission" of course, so it is optional for Apple to charge, however the logic of her refutation of Epics claims seems to strongly imply that Apple shouldn't be singling out digital purchases made within apps.