The laws of nations shape markets and commerce. And companies advance via business models they operate on. Yes, the US Supreme Court has normalized Apple Pay with an external link – “In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection to hear Apple’s appeal in its protracted legal battle with Epic Games, the tech giant has unveiled a series of substantial adjustments to the App Store Guidelines” – but Apple has also covered its flanks with a new “tax” – “Developers using alternative payment platforms will be subject to a commission of 12% if they are part of the App Store Small Business Program and 27% for other apps”.

Check carefully, there is no alternative: companies do not innovate only to disarm and even courts cannot make that happen.  The only solution to what people call an “unfair” Apple Pay policy is to create a better product than Apple.

Good People, what is the difference between 12 and a dozen? Ask the new Apple Pay policy! Poor Epic Games, you just made some lawyers richer for largely nothing.

Get me right, I am not into those activism. The New York Times refused to pay Twitter but expected people to pay for its content. Microsoft Office did not allow many things until Google Doc came. And Yahoo Mail was terrible with 4MB space until Gmail was launched. Simply, there is a way to put companies in line, and using courts and lawyers rarely deliver any transformational real change, as when you close one, they open another flank. To get real change, a new basis of competition is required and that is the message Apple Pay policy will listen to.

Apple Reverses App Store Guidelines, Allows External Link Payment Following Supreme Court Decision in Epic Games Battle

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection to hear Apple’s appeal in its protracted legal battle with Epic Games, the tech giant has unveiled a series of substantial adjustments to the App Store Guidelines.

These changes, effective immediately, are a direct response to the outcome of the 2021 Apple vs. Epic trial, specifically targeting the anti-steering rules that had hitherto restricted developers from incorporating links to alternative payment systems within their apps.

The revised guidelines, initially tailored for dating applications in the Netherlands, now extend their reach to the United States. The primary alteration centers around the relaxation of anti-steering rules, permitting developers to include links to alternative payment methods. However, the caveat is that the app must continue to offer purchases through Apple’s In-App Purchase system.

Developers, eager to take advantage of this newfound flexibility, can apply for an entitlement allowing them to integrate buttons or links directing users to external purchasing mechanisms.

“Developers may apply for an entitlement to provide a link in their app to a website the developer owns or maintains responsibility for in order to purchase such items,” the guideline noted. “In accordance with the entitlement agreement, the link may inform users about where and how to purchase those in-app purchase items, and the fact that such items may be available for a comparatively lower price.”

Apple noted that this entitlement is exclusive to the iOS or iPadOS App Store on the United States storefront. In other storefronts, apps, and metadata may not include buttons, links, or calls to action redirecting customers to alternative purchasing mechanisms.

The guidelines stipulate that the link to an alternative payment platform should be displayed on a single app page navigated by the end user, excluding interstitials, modals, or pop-ups. It must occupy a dedicated location and should not persist beyond that page.

In an effort to assist developers in transparently communicating with customers about alternative in-app payment systems, Apple has provided templates. Examples include prompts like “For special offers go to [X],” “Lower prices offered at [X],” “To get [X%] off, go to [X],” and “Buy for [$X.XX] at [X].”

Despite these noteworthy changes, Apple is adamant about maintaining its commission structure. Developers using alternative payment platforms will be subject to a commission of 12% if they are part of the App Store Small Business Program and 27% for other apps.

The commission will apply to “purchases made within seven days after a user taps on an External Purchase Link and continues from the system disclosure sheet to an external website.”

Apple says developers will be required to provide an accounting of qualifying out-of-app purchases and remit the appropriate commissions.

This monumental decision follows the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear Apple’s appeal, upholding the original ruling and compelling the company to implement changes.

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney, responding to the news, took to X to highlight the far-reaching implications of this decision for developers and the broader app ecosystem.

“The Supreme Court denied both sides’ appeals of the Epic v. Apple antitrust case. The court battle to open iOS to competing stores and payments is lost in the United States. A sad outcome for all developers,” he said.

As the dust settles, these changes are expected to reshape the dynamics of app development and distribution, offering developers increased flexibility in their payment options within the Apple ecosystem.

However, Sweeney pointed out that “Apple has introduced an anticompetitive new 27% tax on web purchases,” noting that the company has never taken the anticompetitive step before.

“Developers can’t offer digital items more cheaply on the web after paying a third-party payment processor 3-6% and paying this new 27% Apple Tax,” he said.