Apple updates rules surrounding EU DMA compliance to address developer concerns

Apple updates how developers are affected by its EU DMA compliance

Developers in the EU have improved the ability to sign up for Apple's updated terms, a one-time exit clause, and new eligibility criteria that should address many concerns.

After Apple announced how it would handle the European Union Digital Markets Act, it was called malicious compliance by some. After meeting with developers and copious feedback, Apple has made some changes to those rules days before the DMA goes into effect.

According to information provided by Apple and updated documentation, the terms have had three significant changes made to address developer concerns. It'll be easier to create an alternative marketplace and undo the new contract if needed.

The new rules created by the DMA are not required for developers. The developer must opt-in and sign an addendum agreeing to new rules regarding how Apple gets a commission.

Apple has removed the corporate entity requirement that made it so every account attached to a company had to sign the contract addendum. It is now controlled on the account level, allowing a business to manage multiple developer accounts with different rules in and out of the App Store.

A primary concern surrounding Apple's new EU rules was the Core Technology Fee, which would require developers to pay a half euro for each annual install over a threshold of 1 million. This rule could cause financial trouble for apps like Widgetsmith that wouldn't make enough money to cover a sudden $50k bill due to a spike in popularity.

Now, if a developer approaches the one million download mark, there is a single chance to back out of the new contract. The developer can terminate the addendum and return to having an app in the App Store with the usual 30% or 15% cut.

That one-time escape clause can be activated at any time. However, if the developer signs the addendum again, there's no going back.

Finally, Apple has made it easier for developers to create alternative app marketplaces by not requiring a standby letter of credit under certain circumstances. If the developer's account has existed for two years and has an established app business in the EU with more than 1 million first annual installs, the entity could open an alternative marketplace without the standby letter of credit.

The ability to run alternative app marketplaces or download apps from outside of the App Store is enabled by iOS 17.4. Apple released iOS 17.4 to the public earlier on Tuesday.

Follow AppleInsider on Google News

17 Comments

libertymatters

said about 1 month ago

A maze of red tape to make it prohibitive. An alternative app store on macOS requires no interaction or input from Apple at all. An example is MacPorts. The real answer here is customers demanding app freedom on iOS and iPadOS from Apple and voting with their dollars if Apple doesn't deliver. The same app freedoms should exist on iOS/iPadOS as has existed on macOS since 1984: 'sideloading' allowed. The very term 'sideloading' is itself a loaded term that presumes an authority that Apple doesn't have, control of YOUR device. It is your device not Apple's. You should be able to load on it whatever app you darn well please. That is still true on the Mac. It should be true for iPhones too.

red oak

said about 1 month ago

libertymatters said:

A maze of red tape to make it prohibitive. An alternative app store on macOS requires no interaction or input from Apple at all. An example is MacPorts. The real answer here is customers demanding app freedom on iOS and iPadOS from Apple and voting with their dollars if Apple doesn't deliver. The same app freedoms should exist on iOS/iPadOS as has existed on macOS since 1984: 'sideloading' allowed. The very term 'sideloading' is itself a loaded term that presumes an authority that Apple doesn't have, control of YOUR device. It is your device not Apple's. You should be able to load on it whatever app you darn well please. That is still true on the Mac. It should be true for iPhones too.

No one wants this other than a few greedy, hypocritical developers. Apple went ahead and has now created a whole system with full support for alternative app stores. Let’s see now if more than 10 people use them

I’ll enjoy watching these app stores fall on their faces

chasm

said about 1 month ago

Mr. “I do my own research” in post #1 fails to note that Mac malware is far more prevelant than it is on iOS precisely because sideloading is allowed (not to mention Android, which has the same problem). He also conveniently omits that the Mac App Store is far and away the dominant source of Mac apps, even though users have “freedom of choice” to get their apps anywhere.

The same thing is going to happen here — the Apple App Store will remain the dominant place to get apps, and I predict that most alternative app stores will close up shop within two years of opening, because very few if any of them will be able to convince users that they are as safe, secure, privacy-focused (that’s a big one), and generally trustworthy as Apple’s Store (this is also the case with Google/Android, incidentally).

This is NOT, btw, me arguing there shouldn’t be any alternative App Stores. Quite the opposite, actually. But it’s a LOT of money and work to build a store with the kind of stellar reputation Apple’s store has, and thus the ones most likely to succeed to are either very big corporations that have a lot of money and technical savvy behind them to convince users they are safe, OR small sites that specialize strictly in apps that Apple doesn’t allow (read: porn, mostly).

CheeseFreeze

said about 1 month ago

libertymatters said:

A maze of red tape to make it prohibitive. An alternative app store on macOS requires no interaction or input from Apple at all. An example is MacPorts. The real answer here is customers demanding app freedom on iOS and iPadOS from Apple and voting with their dollars if Apple doesn't deliver. The same app freedoms should exist on iOS/iPadOS as has existed on macOS since 1984: 'sideloading' allowed. The very term 'sideloading' is itself a loaded term that presumes an authority that Apple doesn't have, control of YOUR device. It is your device not Apple's. You should be able to load on it whatever app you darn well please. That is still true on the Mac. It should be true for iPhones too.

Well said and good observation around the term “side loading”, which by itself is a propaganda term. It’s really simply “downloading”.

As long as the operating system has the necessary protections to “sandbox” security on a per app-level and the app not having the ability to touch things like the kernel or system level services, it’s perfectly fine to place the responsibility in the user’s hands when it comes to downloading from other sources.

The snarky, somewhat juvenile comments from “Chasm” feel like fanboyism, defending a large corporation who has been actively lobbying a false narrative of security vs exploits, but is really only interested in two things: control and profits.
It reduces what can be a mature dialogue to personal attacks, and this keeps happening on this forum.
It is just a matter of time before these rules become the new standard. EU is considered a perfect pilot for the US and other territories.

paisleydisco

said about 1 month ago

" it’s perfectly fine to place the responsibility in the user’s hands when it comes to downloading from other sources."Meh. Lots and lots of many dumb people with iPhones. Their responsibility until they start crying to Apple about their compromised iPhone.

Just the other day a friend's friend was showing us some page to purchase Watch faces from within the Facebook app. No matter how many times we explained it wasn't from Apple's app store he just kept pointing at his iPhone saying it was an Apple iPhone. He was really confused of why we were telling him he was going to purchase something inside his Facebook app and he kept insisting he was buying it from Apple. LMAO!

This is the future of alt app stores and dumb people just being ignorant.