There is way to little talk about this. Apple might still be entitled to the 30% (of gross purchase price paid by the customer) even if the developer is not using the IAP mechanism. The ruling did nothing to invalidate that.
Apple would be playing with fire if they attempt that interpretation. It would detooth the ruling, and could force the judges hand to impose stricter or more vague requirements. The judge certainly not have an issue with the api design...
“In such a hypothetical world, developers could potentially avoid the commission while benefitting from Apple’s innovation and intellectual property free of charge. The Court presumes that in such circumstances that Apple may rely on imposing and utilizing a contractual right to audit developers annual accounting to ensure compliance with its commissions, among other methods. Of course, any alternatives to IAP (including the foregoing) would seemingly impose both increased monetary and time costs to both Apple and the developers.”
Hey FDSGSG I see you used my comment to implement your reply. As you no doubt know my API usage policy is 30% of your gross.
Note, you cannot deduct the 30% your electric utility charges you, nor the 30% your PC monitor maker charges you, nor the 30% your desk maker charges, you'll have to figure out how to finance your development out of the other -40%.
If this is not acceptable obviously you could have written your reply to my comment under any other comment. There are many other comments you could freely leave your reply to me under. You choose to use my comment to base your reply to no doubt because that's the only one I read. Still of course, I do not have a monopoly on replies to me under all posts on the internet. Replies under my comment are of course not a monopoly because you can freely reply to me anywhere else. For example, you could have replied to my post on your grandma's Facebook.