Quote:
|
The case stems from a 2011 class-action suit by iPhone owners alleging that by taking a 30% cut of app sales, Apple has encouraged app developers to raise their prices in response. Consumers have been harmed by the practice, the suit claimed, because Apple does not allow customers to download apps from any other source other than the iTunes App Store. Unlike Android, iOS customers can only get apps from that official source, which Apple says serves as kind of quality control to weed out security threats and apps that violate the company's terms of service.
|
It's not about maintaining a single app store, it's about companies like Spotify and Netflix not being able to sell a subscription without giving 30% to the app store. I think it makes sense, and allows 3rd parties to maintain more of their revenue. It's anti-competitive in that Apple also has their version of Spotify that competes directly but isn't really subject to the 30% handicap.