| >Why is it unethical to charge a fee to developers who want to distribute their software through an app store that Apple owns? This is only part of the complaint, right? The other parts is that: * Apple has the only keys to the hardware platform. * This is in contrast to Google or Steam, who also charge 30%, but do not completely own access to their respective hardware platforms. * This is also in contrast to physical stores, because if a store does not sell a product (i.e. a grocery store chain does not carry some brand of beer), the product owner can usually still put it somewhere else that the consumer can freely access (excluding transportation costs). * The policy regarding whether Apple should be entitled to the subscription fee is inconsistent and full of exceptions, which this website illustrates. My cynical take is that these exceptions have no real philosophy behind them, other than the fact that Apple needed certain major apps to be on iOS (i.e. Netflix, Tesla, Bloomberg, etc.). * Slightly separate point, but still relevant: if Apple is entitled to subscription fees, Apple can make competitors that undercut other subscription services like Spotify, because they don't have to pay themselves the 30% fee. This is what Spotify complained about last year, and what I believe the EU is looking at. [1] [1] https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/16/21292651/apple-eu-antitru... (edit log: added newlines for easier reading) |