Then, you make a side deal where you'll pay $399,999 for a houseplant. Then you have a revelation: why should we pay commission to these realtors? Instead, you agree to buy the house for $1, so you only have to pay $0.14 in commission. But nothing prevents app developers from giving those things away, too, nor does anything pre Occasionally, they're things like articles of clothing for a character, in which case, yay, Apple distributes an extra half a kilobyte as part of the app bundle. They're mostly things like "1000 crystals" or whatever - in-game things that you can earn in other ways or that you can pay for if you want to save time and effort. In-app purchases are not generally something "delivered". Or the law fails to pass and Epic still loses.Ī better analogy would be if Amazon decided to require all of their third-party merchants to use Fulfillment By Amazon, and the government passed a law that says, "No, you can't do that." Another better analogy would be the government compelling eBay to stop requiring the use of PayPal after that acquisition.īetter than that, this is forcing Amazon to sell and ship the item, but they don't get any payment for any of their work as the manufacturer direct charges the customer and avoids paying Amazon for any of the delivery or even the cost of the product itself, and the web hosting of the listing. In the end, it's going to be a fun fight - because either Apple has to open up, which forces Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo to open up and Epic loses badly because they've just screwed over their golden goose. In the end, it's going to be one precariously narrow path to separate the two - which means all Apple has to do is change one thing and it's excluded again. And given the heavy indie game push, it's even more dubious. It also can't be the fact that Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony screen developers, because for $20 you can write code for the Xbox (which is how the Xbox has even greater backwards compatibility these days, being able to do what Sony don't - play PSX and PS2 games). And vice-versa, with many games on PC and consoles moved to mobile. (Yes, there are many really good non-ripoff mobile games, and quite a few moved from iPhone and Androids to PC and game consoles). That it can run Office? You can use Office with the Xbox, too (using O365 and the built-in browser).Īnd that's where all the nastiness comes in - because do it enough and it looks like you're just targeting Apple, which makes it a bill of attainder even without mentioning Apple by name.Īnd if you say "Xbox is a game console" well, what's the definition of a game console? Apple certainly makes "game consoles" by most reasonable definitions - their devices play games, some so sophisticated that they've jumped from mobile to PC and game consoles. There has to be a solid legal definition that defines what Apple and Google does as distinct from what Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo do, and other than really contorted arguments that really go into fine minutiae, it starts being complex.Īfter all, all the stores sell apps and games - granted you can do more with an iPhone than an Xbox, but then you have to define what that "more" is. That's like creating a law that applies to Walmart and Target, but not to another department store, like Walgreens. We know why (Epic would be banned almost immediately), but there has to be legal justification for why one store is allowed, and not another. The bill specifically exempts game consoles "and other special-purpose devices that are connected to the internet," and it also bars companies like Apple and Google from retaliating against developers who choose to use third-party payment systems.īecause a law needs ot explain why exclusions exist. The amendment specifically prohibits stores exceeding 1 million downloads from requiring "a developer that is domiciled in this state to use a particular in-application payments system as the exclusive mode of accretive payments from a user." It also covers users living in Arizona from having to pay for apps using exclusive payment systems. It will now head to the state senate, where it must pass before its sent to Arizona Gov. From a report: The legislation, a sweeping amendment to Arizona's existing HB2005, prevents app store operators from forcing a developer based in the state to use a preferred payment system, putting up a significant roadblock to Apple and Google's ability to collect commissions on in-app purchases and app sales. The Arizona House of Representatives just passed landmark app store legislation in a 31-29 vote on Wednesday that could have far-reaching consequences for Apple and Google and their respective mobile operating systems.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |