“Apple is further tightening its control of the App Store,” Claire Cain Miller and Miguel Helft report for The New York Times. “The company has told some applications developers, including Sony, that they can no longer sell content, like e-books, within their apps, or let customers have access to purchases they have made outside the App Store.”
MacDailyNews Take: Where’s the “tightening?” The App Store never allowed in-app purchases that didn’t go through the proper API. Nor did it prevent stores from selling items outside the app via mobile browser. As John Paczkowski reports for AllThingsD, “Apple’s made no change to its App Store Guidlines, it’s simply enforcing a rule that’s been in them all along: apps that offer purchases elsewhere must support in-app purchases as well. ‘We have not changed our developer terms or guidelines,’ company spokesperson Trudy Miller told me. ‘We are now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase.'”
Miller and Helft report, “Apple rejected Sony’s iPhone application, which would have let people buy and read e-books bought from the Sony Reader Store. Apple told Sony that from now on, all in-app purchases would have to go through Apple, said Steve Haber, president of Sony’s digital reading division. The move could affect companies like Amazon.com and others that sell e-book readers that compete with Apple’s iPad tablet and offer free mobile apps so customers can read their e-book purchases on other devices. An iPad owner, for instance, has not needed to own a Kindle to read Kindle books bought from Amazon.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Bad reporting. There is no “move.” There is nothing new. Apple’s App Store Guidelines clearly state, “Apps utilizing a system other than the In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase content, functionality, or services in an app will be rejected. Apps using IAP to purchase physical goods or goods and services used outside of the application will be rejected.” What part of “will be rejected” did Sony not understand? Sony’s developers ought to learn how to read and The New York Times ought to do a better job reporting the facts. Apple is simply enforcing existing rules and making sellers offer iOS users the option of making more convenient In-App purchases.
It’s sad that Sony has been so diminished as to have to resort to trying to use Apple in a wholly transparent play for free publicity, but there you have it.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
I’m impressed at the amount of misinformation there is on how Amazon’s Kindle app handles purchases on the iPhone.
IT OPENS A SAFARI BROWSER PEOPLE!!!
@dfsg Looks like you don’t know wtf you’re talking about. The IAP is about HOW the message leaves the app, not where it goes. I don’t know for a fact that Amazon is using the IAP to get to their web-site, but I see no reason why they aren’t (or couldn’t).
The part that I would like to see clarification of whether ALL useable content has to be purchased through the IAP and the any content purchased through the IAP was only useable within the App.
I am pretty sure that an app can use content not purchased through the app, as long as it WAS purchased outside the app and that content purchased through the app, and useable by the app is OK to use elsewhere too.
I just think you can’t by stocks, for example,, even AAPL stock through an app
It’s Apple’s store and Apple’s rules. Apple invested in creating their system and they spend their money managing it, Sony and other companies like them are trying to profit of Apple’s work. If you don’t like Apple’s rules, buy from somewhere else.
The only issue I have is that iBooks has no content. Here’s hoping iPad 2 and the coming newspaper Apps will begin to change the sorry lack of content.
@HMCIV, It’s HOW, not WHAT is the question. Does it open the browser using the IAP? probably.
About the 30%. If amazon gains millions of customers, and only has to share the book prices of books purchased through the app, then they should be very happy/
If AAPL gains essentially equality with the Kindle as and e-Reader (it’s the content, stupid) and pockets some spare change from buy through the app, they should be happy too.
Looking at it strategically, it is probably a disaster for Amazon. Look up “fob Pittsburgh” and see how USS monopolized the US steel market.
all of those who think sony is right are dumb.
MDN,
You might want to examine Apple’s followup comments:
“We are now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase.”
“That means Amazon will have to offer their books via in-app purchases as well as online…which means Apple takes 30% of sales.”
So in other words because I have to get Apps from the App store I am forced into paying higher prices or reduced selection because I like to have choice in whom I purchase books from.
Keep this up Apple and you will be looking more like Microsoft all the time.
Amazon is not using an “In App Purchase” they have a link to a web page – which is allowed. Sony wants to be able to browse and buy books in the app itself like iBooks without have the content sold through Apple. Sony needs to set up like Amazon and all will be fine. I don’t know what you people are reading into Apples policy – It is pretty clear.
HA! Love it when something comes up to get all the Apple Haters riled up. They always end up making themselves look like fools!! Thanks for the laughs on the first day of the Great Blizzard of ’11.
I don’t care how you look at this, its stupid.
Apple does not deserve the rights to any compensation jsut because an item is purchased on an IOS device (i.e. through an app). So by the logic Apple has applied, if I buy and sell stock using etrade app, then Apple should get a cut? Are you kidding? For what? They already get a cut off the sell price of the app. Wait so the sale price of the app is zero? So what, to bad. By this logic why does it not extend to lets say safari. Shoudl Apple now block any in-Safari purchases through IOS unless they get a cut?
Economist is right, if they want to sell a service or subscription model on their own that you purchase from their site to then be able to use through there app, howis that Apples business? So let me get this straight, since Apple wants to implement a subscription model all of a sudden, they get to control all subscriptions and in app purchases from here on out? Bull!!!
This is the kind of policy that WILL push people to Android, because it is no longer just aout flash, now you are limiting what the apps can do based on greed.
Indeed this comment clarifies everything. It was very confusing before:
Apple’s made no change to its App Store Guidlines, it’s simply enforcing a rule that’s been in them all along: apps that offer purchases elsewhere must support in-app purchases as well. We have not changed our developer terms or guidelines,” company spokesperson Trudy Miller told me. “We are now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase.”
@oldtech
AGREED!
oldtech:
“So in other words because I have to get Apps from the App store I am forced into paying higher prices….”
Idiot – NO you don’t Have to get Apps from the AppStore…you can get them any way you choose: Direct from the company that makes them, Version tracker, or any other vendor –
The AppStore is just a convenient, hassle free, centralized Apple Store which, if you choose to frequent or distribute from, you have to play by it’s rules.
Why would you expect Apple to track, collect fees, distribute and make payments to and for vendors without having it’s say in what and how it runs IT’S store? And who by the way pays for the development and maintenance of The AppStore?
The only remaining question (for those of us who pay attention and read articles, Apple’s App Store guidelines and subsequent clarifications) is whether Apple will allow developers to charge one specific amount for in-app purchases, and a different amount outside of the App store. That would permit Amazon to enforce their own pricing on their own web site, while charging whatever they fell would compensate them for the extra cut that the middleman Apple would be getting, in addition to the middleman Amazon (between the publisher and the reader, middlemen are).
If Apple forces uniform pricing, current middlemen (i.e. retailers) will have little incentive to re-sell their retail products through another middleman (Apple), considering the hefty cut it takes.
In the end, this all makes sense. It would be pretty much the same as if Sears wanted to sell through Amazon. In addition to Sears taking their cut, Amazon would have to take their own cut.
Let us look at it this way. Apple has a physical (brick & mortar) Apple store in a shopping mall. They sell Apple products, as well as third-party products, and they take commission for each third-party product they sell.
Now, let’s say, Amazon (or Sony) comes and sets up a little computer in that Apple store. They pay Apple a one-time fee to set it up. Now, let’s say that this computer allows shoppers to buy anything that Amazon sells right there. Let’s also say, Amazon’s selection is greater than what the rest of the Apple store has to offer. All they do is make a purchase on that computer and the product is brought to them right there, from the warehouse. Would it not make sense that Apple gets the nominal retail mark-up on this stuff? After all, the floor space belongs to Apple, the expenses of running (power for lights, heat/AC, security, cleaning, retail staff) are all paid for by Apple. What logic would justify letting Amazon (or Sony) run this computer inside Apple’s retail store and sell merchandise without paying Apple ANYTHING for those sales?
@ oldtech
Did you read you own post?
“We are now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase.”
That SEEMS to say that it has to ALSO be available in-app, it does not say that purchasing outside the app has to go away.
I hope Sony does the smart thing, and puts this app on Cydia.
You know this is a bad move on Apple’s part if practically half the mega-fanboys on this site disagree with it.
Greg… Half the trolls in this thread, are not regulars.
They are the android fanbois’s coming to attack apple.
This is quite a conversation. I can say this much. Apple has a way to go in getting publishers to provide eBooks in the iBook store. As a university faculty member (public policy), I have been unable to find the vast majority of texts in the iBook store. I’ve been trying to shift my students over the eBooks, but it’s a useless endeavor for those I’ve urged to buy iPads.
Frankly, Amazon is a bit better in this regard. While they have a long way to go in terms of adding the types of titles I’m speaking of, I have found it more likely that I will find the eBooks in their collection than in the iBooks collection.
Another issue is that I can only view and purchase books from within iBooks. Nothing on the desktop. Here again is where Amazon is ahead. Platform neutrality has proven to be a good thing for eBooks.
When all of the dust has settled, I just hope Amazon is not driven off the iOS platform. That will be truly unfortunate.
David F.:
After all of the dust has settled, I’m sure Apple will not allow themselves to drive Amazon (nor anyone else of signifcance) off the iOS platform. If you are enough of an Apple fan, surely you’ll know that there are plenty of smart people at Apple to make sure such thing doesn’t happen.
Sony, just do what Kindle does. Redirect to a website using Safari for the ebook purchase and push the ebook to Kindle. This method has the advantage of keeping the reader app and e-store separate. It works great that way.
Just wanna say, I am in no way, shape, or form related to or in agreement with “Jim” above…
@ MDN: “Can you please update the article with Apple’s statement so these morons can shut up already.”
It amazes me how reactionary the anti-Apple crowd is, even though time and time again every “report” turns out to be something completely different or moot by Apple’s actual intentions.
#1 Apple still allows companies to sell content outside of their native apps.
#2 If they do this through a native app, then Apple also wants that company to allow customers to purchase content in-app through Apple’s AppStore API.
This is perfectly legitimate. why should Apple cover the cost of providing the platform and delivery system to its competitors free of charge?
Apple sells books and uses iOS as a platform for delivering those books to customers. So does Amazon and that’s what Sony wants to do. However, unlike Apple, those other companies are riding free on iOS, they don’t pay for development of iOS.
All Apple wants is if these companies are going to that then Apple wants a way to make some money from those stores as well. They don’t want a percentage from every sale that company makes, they want a percentage of everything the company sells through the iOS app.
MDN explained Apple’s rules, and the Amazon Kindle conforms those rules, while Sony does not. If you have reading comprehension problems or a logic deficiency, that can’t be blamed on MDN.
Now, saying you disagree with Apple’s policy is different. The point I am making is that MDN is factually correct – if you disagree, you are getting a fact wrong – facts aren’t a matter of opinion, no matter what some politicians/journalists tell you.
Learn the difference between fact and opinion – it will make your life easier (except when you have to deal with annoying people who don’t know the difference and still yell a lot).
So, to recap, for those who still need help. The two rules say the following:
1. You can’t build your own payment system _within your app_ to pay for services/goods used in it. You have to use Apple’s if you want the purchase to happen without leaving your app.
2. You can’t use Apple’s payment system _within your app_ to pay for services/goods that are NOT used within your app. You have to purchase them using something else, outside of your app.
BOTH of those rules are satisfied by not using Apple’s IAP at all, but rather leaving your app and paying for something on a web page in Safari. Amazon does this, and so is NOT violating either rule. Sony decided that they could violate those rules, and so was rejected. Either Sony wanted free publicity, or their lawyers suck at reading technical contractual terms.
Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but NOT yours, and this is an informational explanation, not legal advice.
I’m sorry, but have all you people who are responding stating that Amazon is okay because the Kindle app does purchases via Safari actually READ the article?
‘We have not changed our developer terms or guidelines,’ company spokesperson Trudy Miller told me. ‘We are now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase.'”
So although Apple will apparently still allow purchase outside the app, all apps now need to allow in-app purchasing via Apple as well. This means that Amazon will need to add in-app purchasing! The question is, does enabling this functionality in app and adding a preference to allow the user to choose in-app purchasing our Safari based purchasing meet Apple’s requirement? Obviously Amazon is not going to charge the same for books bought through an in-app purchase if it needs to give Apple a 30% cut, so purchasing via their website will be less expensive, which will likely give Apple’s own iBooks a pricing advantage. Either that or it will require Amazon to make less per book if it needs to match iBooks pricing to be competitive then give Apple a 30% cut.
And the questions still remains as to why this is acceptable. Would it be acceptable for my television manufacturer to insist on 30% of all revenue brought in by cable companies for any content displayed on their device? Will Apple soon require a 30% cut of all physical goods purchased through iOS apps?