Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 26th Jul 2011 21:14 UTC
Apple Petty Apple is petty. Amazon, Kobo, and others have changed their applications to conform to Apple's App Store rules, and if there's one word that describes the situation these booksellers are in, it's petty. Still, it's leading to good things: Kobo has announced it's going to bypass the App Store by writing an HTML5 e-reader for iOS (and thus, for other HTML5-capable mobile devices).
Thread beginning with comment 482908
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Not surprising, really!
by Laurence on Sun 31st Jul 2011 09:59 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Not surprising, really!"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26


But if those are the terms & conditions for using Excel, then you have to adhere to those terms & conditions if you wish to use Excel.

Where in Apple's T&C's does it say that you cannot link to your own website in your own application?

Besides, terms and conditions cannot override law.
If Apples T&Cs are stifling fair competition then Apple should be held accountable.

Edited 2011-07-31 09:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

fmaxwell Member since:
2005-11-13


Where in Apple's T&C's does it say that you cannot link to your own website in your own application?

11.14 Apps can read or play approved content (specifically magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, and video) that is subscribed to or purchased outside of the app, as long as there is no button or external link in the app to buy the approved content. Apple will not receive any portion of the revenues for approved content that is subscribed to or purchased outside of the app

Besides, terms and conditions cannot override law.
If Apples T&Cs are stifling fair competition then Apple should be held accountable.

Apple is distributing their competitor's apps, and all they ask is a cut for in-app sales!

Amazon is stifling fair competition. Is Amazon distributing an Apple iBooks app to Kindle owners, allowing them to buy from the iTunes store? Are they distributing Barnes and Noble's app? Are they distributing Kobo's e-reader app? Where's your anger over that? Where is your anger that Amazon is using their Kindle to monopolize ebook sales to Kindle customers?

Face it: This isn't about logic or reason with you. It's all about your hatred of Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Face it: This isn't about logic or reason with you. It's all about your hatred of Apple.

GET OFF YOUR FUCKING HIGH HORSE!!
I'm as so sick and fucking tired of discussions on here always being lowered to childish drivel like that bullshit.

If you want to make a point, make it. But don't hide behind some pseudo-intellectual bullshit about myself or anyone else being blinkered to reason because of a petty alliance to one company over another.

So please can we get back to talking about technology and leave the second-rate psychology to another news site.

</rant>

11.14 Apps can read or play approved content (specifically magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, and video) that is subscribed to or purchased outside of the app, as long as there is no button or external link in the app to buy the approved content. Apple will not receive any portion of the revenues for approved content that is subscribed to or purchased outside of the app

Fair enough then. However I still don't think that's fair and I still think Amazon et al could have a case against it for anti-competitive practices. However I'm not a lawyer.


Apple is distributing their competitor's apps, and all they ask is a cut for in-app sales!

But Apple have no involvement for those in-app sales. They don't create the content, they didn't distribute the content, they have no involvement in it what-so-ever thus they have no entitlement to it what-so-ever.

Apple is basically forcing their customers to use Apples own distribution channels or pay a percentage for the privilege of using their own distribution channels. It's little better than the strong arm tactics that MS and IBM do.

If people opted for Apples distribution channels because they preferred it, then that's different. Apple can charge what they want and provide whatever service they want as businesses have opted into that service knowing the service they're going to receive. It would have been an entirely open deal. However to force peoples hand the way Apple do, it's completely unethical in my opinion.

Amazon is stifling fair competition. Is Amazon distributing an Apple iBooks app to Kindle owners, allowing them to buy from the iTunes store? Are they distributing Barnes and Noble's app? Are they distributing Kobo's e-reader app? Where's your anger over that? Where is your anger that Amazon is using their Kindle to monopolize ebook sales to Kindle customers?

If the Kindle had the same policy for it's loadable apps (I will admit I've not had any experience in loadable apps for that eBook reader. I only know about the books and hardware specs), then I would also complain about that.

In fact I personally wouldn't shop from Amazon if I had a choice because of their aggressive policy on DRM - which something Apple get right. But clearly I'm faking an opinion here because I'm just a biased Apple hater....sorry back to raging again. However your comment was moronic to say the least.

Reply Parent Score: 2