- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Epic Games v. Apple judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers just ruled that, effective immediately, Apple is no longer allowed to collect fees on purchases made outside apps and blocks the company from restricting how developers can point users to where they can make purchases outside of apps. Apple says it will appeal the order.
The ruling was issued as part of Epic Gamesā ongoing legal dispute against Apple, and itās a major victory for Epicās arguments. Gonzalez Rogers also says that Apple āwillfullyā chose not to comply with her previous injunction from her original 2021 ruling. āThat [Apple] thought this Court would tolerate such insubordination was a gross miscalculation,ā Gonzalez Rogers says.
The judge also referred the case to the US attorney to review it for possible criminal contempt proceedings.
As part of the ruling, the judge says that Apple cannot:
- Impose āany commission or any fee on purchases that consumers make outside an appā
- Restrict developersā style, formatting, or placement of links for purchases outside of an app
- Block or limit the āuse of buttons or other calls to actionā
- Interfere with consumersā choice to leave an app with anything beyond āa neutral message apprising users that they are going to a third-party siteā
Appleās senior director of corporate communications, Olivia Dalton, sent a statement to The Verge that reads, āWe strongly disagree with the decision. We will comply with the courtās order and we will appeal.ā
You must log in or register to comment.
Good! Now force them to allow side loading outside of the EU
Side loading is a pile of shit designed to make it appear that youāre freedom and you arenāt locked into the store when in fact, you are. They still charge bullshit charges, force app notarization etc.
Apple should be forced by someone to turn iOS into what macOS currently is, that is, a system with the ability to run ANY generic non-signed binary if the users chooses to do so. They can burry it under the settings, force people to accept a bunch of warnings but we should be able to run unsigned code.
The current state of things is bullshit, Apple is very good at sandboxing, they can keep the system signed, secure and intact while allowing unsigned code to run.
Apple makes MacOS a little bit more like iOS on every update š
Yeah, this is unfortunate.
I donāt understand. Side loading is great i donāt need to use the Google play store on Android any more I can use obtanium, accresent and f-droid thatās not possible on ios.
You donāt understand, because side loading in iOS doesnāt not work like it does in Android - not even close. Side loading in iOS is full of restrictions, apps that only work for 3 days and require reinstall etc.
Sorry I didnāt realise you were talking about iPhone side loading specifically. But dang IOS side loading is really bad, the eu could have done something to at least enforce a side loading feature that was useful.
Apple carefully made it in a way that complies with the law but doesnāt really change anything. And imposed small charges and requirements here and there com make it totally impractical.
they can keep the system signed, secure and intact
If you cannot set up your own signed, secure and intact system outside of the one Apple controls, none of those matter. If they truly gave a shit about security they would do what Linux does and allow anyone to self host their entire software infrastructure including package repositories, or at the very least do what Android does and allow installing of other app stores (including one you can self host). Signed, secure and intact are worthless if you are forced to trust someone elseās app store and signatures.
Of course the real reason they do this is to prevent people from 1, running pirated versions of paid apps, and 2, bypassing their in app purchase commission. DRM to ensure they get their cut. Signed, secure and intact have not a damn thing to do with it.
a system with the ability to run ANY generic non-signed binary if the users chooses to do so
I guess you didnāt read this part.
allow installing of other app stores
Because this is all good, but it is way more simple for Apple to allow us to run unsigned code than to come up with all the infrastructure so you can sign your apps without 3rd parties.
Honestly who cares. IDGAF if some shitty corpo has to pay another shitty corpo a cut to sell stuff on second corpo devices or not. I donāt think it would materially affect pricing, it would just serve to increase profits of sellers. Either way the user is stuck in a walled garden curated by Apple to make sure you can only get corporate proprietary overpriced bullshit. If they forced Apple to allow sideloading/alternative app stores, and also EU got its shit together and enforced user-replaceable batteries, I might consider an iPhone.
I donāt think it would materially affect pricing, it would just serve to increase profits of sellers.
Since when in our capitalist history has any corporation willfully given up any cut of profit for any reason? Of course they will pass this on to the customers, and the customers will gleefully eat it because their favorite merchandiser masters will it from them.
It, of course affects pricing. If they pay $5 to apple, you pay $5 more. Itās just like Trumpās tariffs. The end user pays. Sure, the market encourages keeping prices down to attract customers, but if everyone pays a toll, you canāt compete below that.
Now the companies can. Just like you donāt care about companies paying each other, companies donāt care where they can cut costs. Making their product cheaper, and therefore more attractive to increase sales is good for them. In this case it just happens to be good for consumers too. They may not pass on that hypothetical $5 but if they pass on $4, weāre still better off. Apple is worse off.
I wonder how long before services are targeted for tariffs in response to Trump. It may be that prices for apps and games go back up immediately.
Weāll see. Given how locked down the Apple ecosystem is, often thereās no real alternative for a given software, so the pricing model is āhow much can we chargeā rather than anything competitive. Thereās simply no incentive for companies to bring the cost down when people buy the software already. So yes, costs will be cut, but the prices will not, all for the line to go up.
You should care, because thatās how Apple gets stronger and monopolies are created.
āCreatedā? Thereās been a duopoly since the inception of smartphone. This ruling does literally nothing to change that. Even sideloading wouldnāt fully fix that. The only true fix is to force manufacturers to provide an unlocked bootloader and drivers (at least binaries), but I canāt see this happening.
The true fix is that politics and regulations matter, and we canāt just exchange memes all day long without ever getting involved in politics.
Because if we do not, someone else will, and chances are itās gonna be someone looking to personally profit from our exploitation.
Yeah, kind of. However under capitalism getting regulations passed is at best a temporary fix until the capitalist hands out enough bribes. Unless by āgetting involved in politicsā you mean ājoin your local socialist partyā.
Run for office.
Iām thinking about it myself, Iām no less capable than a lot of these clowns.
And no corpo can buy ever possibly buy me.
Iāve played Cyberpunk and I aināt interested in that kind of future.
There is only one Phone on the earth that supports lots of features for disabled people. Its the IPhone. Its a monopoly.
This will also benefit small devs. Your points regarding side loading are valid, but plenty of people will not use that feature so this is a big win regardless. Plenty of solo dev apps allow tips or have paid features so now they are able to direct you elsewhere and get the full amount.
