South Korea passes a law allowing alternate payment platforms on mobile

[stew1411]

Summary:

South Korea has passed a law limiting Apple and Google control over payment methods. The new law says that app developers must be allowed to choose the payment processor of their choice, bypassing Apple or Google altogether if they so wish. Apple and Google have both responded saying the new law is damaging to them. The law is awaiting signature by the president.

 

Quote

The bill, approved Tuesday, means that developers will be able to avoid paying commission to major app store operators — like Google and Apple — by directing users to pay via alternate platforms.

My thoughts:

I know this doesn’t mean anything for North America right now. But usually once one country enacts a law of this sort, other countries follow suit shortly after, or pass a law similar. It’s not a win-win yet, but it’s a first step in the right direction. And hopefully this new law in South Korea will be able to help Epic in their current lawsuit against Apple.

 

Source:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/08/31/south-korea-first-country-to-curb-google-apples-in-app-billing-policies.html

[hishnash]

2 hours ago, stew1411 said:

And hopefully this new law in South Korea will be able to help Epic in their current lawsuit against Apple.

if the judge let law changes of another nation affect her judgment it would be way too easy to overthrow said judgment in the appeals court.  These things will be kept separated the judge is also not permitted to consider anything that happened after they evince strange finished since neither apple nor epic at this point can present further details.



 

[Vishera]

2 hours ago, stew1411 said:

Summary:

South Korea has passed a law limiting Apple and Google control over payment methods. The new law says that app developers must be allowed to choose the payment processor of their choice, bypassing Apple or Google altogether if they so wish. Apple and Google have both responded saying the new law is damaging to them. The law is awaiting signature by the president.

 

My thoughts:

I know this doesn’t mean anything for North America right now. But usually once one country enacts a law of this sort, other countries follow suit shortly after, or pass a law similar. It’s not a win-win yet, but it’s a first step in the right direction. And hopefully this new law in South Korea will be able to help Epic in their current lawsuit against Apple.

 

Source:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/08/31/south-korea-first-country-to-curb-google-apples-in-app-billing-policies.html

As matter of fact attempting to monopolize or monopolizing a  part of a trade - is a felony according to the  Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.

The FTC just selectively enforces the law.

 

BTW, A felony is a crime in US law and can land you in prison...

 

So Google and Apple monopolizing payment processing on mobile phones is a crime...

 

Quote

Section 2:

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony [. . . ]^[12]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890

[whm1974]

1 hour ago, Vishera said:

As matter of fact attempting to monopolize or monopolizing a  part of a trade - is a felony according to the  Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.

The FTC just selectively enforces the law.

 

BTW, A felony is a crime in US law and can land you in prison...

 

So Google and Apple monopolizing payment processing on mobile phones is a crime...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890

Both Apple and Google earn more Profit each Year then several small Nations GDP combined. Good Luck...

[Forbidden Wafer]

4 hours ago, stew1411 said:

[...] bypassing Apple or Google altogether if they so wish. Apple and Google have both responded saying the new law is damaging to them. 

Spoiler

 

 

[HRD]

1 hour ago, Vishera said:

As matter of fact attempting to monopolize or monopolizing a  part of a trade - is a felony according to the  Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.

The FTC just selectively enforces the law.

 

BTW, A felony is a crime in US law and can land you in prison...

 

So Google and Apple monopolizing payment processing on mobile phones is a crime...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890

The court doesn’t use it the way you said because if they do almost every contract does restrain trade in some respect and would be deemed illegal so the Supreme Court has decided that they should use the rule of reason analysis.

[Donut417]

5 hours ago, stew1411 said:

know this doesn’t mean anything for North America right now. But usually once one country enacts a law of this sort, other countries follow suit shortly after, or pass a law similar. It’s not a win-win yet, but it’s a first step in the right direction. And hopefully this new law in South Korea will be able to help Epic in their current lawsuit against Apple.

Firstly the lawsuit is taking place in the US District Court for Northern District of California according to Wikipedia and last I seen, South Korean law means jack shit in the US. 

 

Secondly, would it even be possible to pass such as law here in the US? According to Wikipedia a bill was introduced. But with all the other crap going on, Covid, Mass Evictions, and other things..... I doubt this is a big issue. Plus with all the money tied in to the US political system, it about how much money you're willing to spend. 

[whm1974]

2 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Secondly, would it even be possible to pass such as law here in the US? According to Wikipedia a bill was introduced. But with all the other crap going on, Covid, Mass Evictions, and other things..... I doubt this is a big issue. Plus with all the money tied in to the US political system, it about how much money you're willing to spend. 

Very few would spend the kind of money needed. At the moment Congress does more important matters to deal with anyway.

[Brooksie359]

6 hours ago, Vishera said:

As matter of fact attempting to monopolize or monopolizing a  part of a trade - is a felony according to the  Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.

The FTC just selectively enforces the law.

 

BTW, A felony is a crime in US law and can land you in prison...

 

So Google and Apple monopolizing payment processing on mobile phones is a crime...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890

That is such an oversimplification of a complex issue. An app store is a service and obviously the way they choose to setup the service is to get a cut of the sales that apps make. That doesn't mean they are monopolizing payment options. The monopoly you could argue is the limiting of third party app stores on Apple phones but payment method isn't really a sound argument as that is basically what alot of online stores do. I mean at that point stream would be considered a monopoly because you can't circumvent steam taking a cut of your sales with third party payment methods. 

[Vishera]

7 hours ago, HRD said:

The court doesn’t use it the way you said because if they do almost every contract does restrain trade in some respect and would be deemed illegal so the Supreme Court has decided that they should use the rule of reason analysis.

You are talking about the first section,while i talked about the second section.

 

2 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

An app store is a service

Doesn't matter what it is,if Apple prevents others from operating competing payment services - it's a monopoly.

 

It's anti-competitive because their actions are monopolizing a part of a trade and severely harms competition - and that's what antitrust laws are meant to prevent.

 

2 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

isn't really a sound argument as that is basically what alot of online stores do.

Just because a lot of companies do that doesn't mean it's legal.

 

[Arika]

7 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

I mean at that point steam would be considered a monopoly because you can't circumvent steam taking a cut of your sales with third party payment methods. 

Yes there is.

 

Developers can generate any number of steam keys and sell them where ever they like, their own website, GoG, hell even ebay

 

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/keys

 

All steam asks is that you don't abuse this service as a developer

[RejZoR]

Steam provides bandwidth and actual exposure. Because how many times would users go to developer's homepage if there even is one and buy game there opposed to buy it on Steam itself? Devs are legal to do that, but Valve damn well knows majority of sales will be done on Steam anyway. So they don't worry about it.

[Vishera]

15 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

I mean at that point stream would be considered a monopoly because you can't circumvent steam taking a cut of your sales with third party payment methods. 

Steam is not a monopoly since it doesn't prevent competition from forming and operating,and it's record is fairly clean from anti-competitive violations.

But the Google Play store is in a gray area:

While it allows competition to form, it doesn't really let it operate due to it's fair share of anti-competitive actions.

[Brooksie359]

3 hours ago, Vishera said:

Steam is not a monopoly since it doesn't prevent competition from forming and operating,and it's record is fairly clean from anti-competitive violations.

But the Google Play store is in a gray area:

While it allows competition to form, it doesn't really let it operate due to it's fair share of anti-competitive actions.

My point still stands that it's not the place for them to allow third party payment methods for apps hosted on Googles or Apple's store. They are not really addressing the issue and simply allowing app developers to use Googles and Apple's store without having to give a cut of their profit which is a horrible idea. Just allow for better competition with third party stores.