Hacker News Reader

Comment by chmaynard | Hacker News Reader

From the article:

"Apple is leveraging their iOS monopoly into an adjacent market — the digital content market — and rent-seeking. Apple does nothing to increase the value of Netflix shows or Spotify music or Amazon books or any number of digital services from any number of app providers; they simply skim off 30% because they can."

If I download and use the Netflix app, Does Apple really take 30% of the monthly Netflix subscription payment? If so, that seems unreasonable because Netflix is doing most of the work of streaming the content.

View on HN

It depends on whether you sign up within the app or sign up on the Netflix site and simply log into the app. Paying through Apple will give them the 30% cut.

OK. Then that's legal.

If you could only get access to it through Apple, that could be illegal. Of course, only to the extent that Apple is a monopoly. Or at least a majority market holder? So, yeah, trying to argue that in front a 9 supremes, who are sticklers for getting this sort of thing right, is not likely to go well. We really should have changed the laws, and only after the laws were changed, should we have gone after the tech companies. Would have been much more successful.

Doing what we're doing is just a display for the purposes of getting votes. It's like the politicians don't even think the issue is serious, they just want to try to get some votes.

Which, I suppose, is their only real goal anyway.

The difference being, that all app subscriptions and payments made on device are forced to use Apple payments as a supplier. The fact that Netflix is diverse enough allow an independent web payment option is a red herring, because there are many iOS apps that are not. Consumers are forced to use Apple payments by Apple.

I tend to think that Apple should keep IAPs for actual in-app features but things like ebooks and video subscriptions should be treated like physical goods, where app makers can offer their own payment (and fulfillment). Amazon doesn't pay 30% for items purchased with the Amazon app, but it would if it offered Kindle purchases. This distinction makes no sense, since ebooks aren't app features or game gems or whatever. IAPs for such features make sense, since otherwise every app would just be "free" with pay-to-unlock and Apple getting nothing for running the store.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com