Apple is giving up its App Store position in the face of Dutch regulators and Tinder

apple announced on Friday It has once again updated its rules on how Dutch dating apps use third-party payment systems, after the company had “productive conversations with the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM).” Updated rules Giving developers more flexibility about the payment systems they use, changing the language users see when paying, and removing other restrictions put in place by previous rules.

While the rules aren’t extensive (again, they only apply to Dutch dating apps), they do show what Apple is willing to do to comply with government regulations – which it may face as often as the European Union and the United States. Get ready to fight tech monopoliesAnd the company may be forced to Get rid of the iPhone’s Lightning port.

In December ACM announce judgment That Apple was forced to allow dating apps to use payment services alongside those built into iOS, after the regulator received a complaint from Match Group, the company behind dating services such as Tinder, Match.com and OkCupid. Since then, Apple has Suggestion a variety From solutions to comply with the order, which the regulator said Not good enough. In May, the ACM said Apple’s latest rules, those before Friday’s update, were improvements to its earlier ideas, but they still did not comply with Dutch and European laws.

There has been increasing pressure on Apple to comply: Even as the company worked on changes, it was Collect tens of millions of euros in fines.

The changes Apple announced on Friday are an important update to its previous proposal Posted in March. The rules still make developers show users a message before they see the third-party payment screen, which can be either in the app or on an external website, but Apple’s proposed new language is less likely to scare away potential customers in my country. Opinion.

Originally, the proposed language was as follows:

This app does not support the App Store payment system.

All purchases in this app will be managed by the developer “Developer Name”. You will no longer do business with Apple. Your payment method stored in the App Store and related features, such as subscription management and refund requests, will not be available. Apple is not responsible for the privacy or security of transactions with this developer.

Now, you read:

Your payment will be managed by the developer. You will no longer do business with Apple.

All purchases in this application will be handled by the service provider specified by the developer “developerName”. The developer will be responsible for the payment methods and related features such as subscriptions and refunds. App Store features such as payment method stored in the App Store, subscription management, and refund requests will not be available.

The options that users will see in the router are also different. Before that, they were seeing ‘Continue’ or ‘Cancel’ buttons. It has been replaced by a button that says “I understand”. The messages that users will see if the developer links them outside the app (to a third party payment site) also got a rewrite in the same vein.

According to Apple’s new rules, developers also won’t have to choose between a third-party in-app payment or an external payment link; They could use both if they wanted, which wasn’t the case before. They’ll also be able to show how much something costs — Apple removed a rule saying that an external payment link cannot include “the price of items available on a website that you own or are responsible for.”

The old rules you can read From this web archive here, has specific requirements for third-party payment processors if a developer wants to use their services in their app. Before Friday’s changes, developers will have to find a processor that supports things like:

• “View payment method and its variation (support for credit cards, debit cards, etc.)”
• Value-added services such as transaction tax management and processing
• Payment security and privacy policies that “go beyond Tier 1 payment card industry compliance”

The rules also specify how reliable a payment processor can be, saying that it must be 99.9 percent available and respond to requests within 300 milliseconds. Apple still has some requirements for third-party payment processors, but they seem to be much broader in scope – they are now things like “meet Payment Cards Level 1 (PCI) compliance to handle credit and debit card data” and “set all prices” for selling merchandise and digital services for users in the Netherlands in the euro currency.

Apple also says it has updated its third-party payments commission structure. Previous rules made it seem as if Dutch dating app developers would do it You must pay a commission of 27 percent On third party transactions no matter what. While that’s a 3 percent off Apple’s standard 30 percent discount on in-app purchases, having to pay 27 percent would be a huge increase over the 15 percent developers pay in the App Store’s Small Business Program, or from The 15 percent paid by developers from revenue from recurring subscriptions after users keep their subscription for a year.

Now, Apple says it offers a three percent discount when you go through a third-party payment processor, period — if you were going to pay Apple 30 percent, you would now pay 27, and if you were to pay 15 percent, you would pay 12. While this small discount doesn’t Still a clear message from Apple that developers shouldn’t bother looking elsewhere (especially given the extra work involved, and the fact that third-party payment systems will have their own fees), the change means at least that junior developers won’t pay The iPhone manufacturer has a higher percentage if they choose to go to a third party.

ACM does not appear to have addressed Apple’s commission structure in its earlier rejection of the company’s proposals.

in Friday latest newsApple makes it clear that it’s not particularly happy with the situation you’re in. “Because Apple is committed to constructive engagement with regulators, we are making additional changes at the request of the ACM,” the company says, but also does not believe that some of the changes are “in the interest of our users”. Privacy or data security. The company also reiterates that it does not agree with the original order and is appealing it.