Yeah, I kinda feel like Apple would consider "customers in North Dakota" as a small enough number that it'd be more important to them to keep the status quo than keep the customers.
And customers from ND would just get pissed at their elected representatives and pressure them to repeal the law. And in the meantime they'd go to another state to buy their iPhone or iPad or have an out-of-state relative buy it for them and mail it to them.
Unfortunately this kind of law needs to be from a state like CA or NY (or quite a few smaller states) for it to be effective.
It probably wouldn’t have done even that—the bill applied only to companies based in North Dakota, who make over $10 million per year through app stores they run. So, nobody. It was just to get the ball rolling.
The bill is pretty straight forward and can be found here [1]. There are 4 requirements which together fill about half a page. A, C, and D seem entirely reasonable in my opinion.
B is the controversial one.
A provider of a digital application distribution platform may not:
B) Require a developer to use the provider's digital transaction platform or in application payment system as the exclusive means for accepting payment from a user to download the developer's software application, or purchase a digital or physical product or service created, offered, or provided by the developer through a software application.
It seems reasonable that the app store should be able set processing requirements the for apps within the store.
What should be legislated and allowed is the ability of users to download alternative app stores onto their devices if they want to live outside of the walled garden.
Sad news, honestly wish more states would or even countries would do something along the lines of this bill.
It's not apples phone after they sell. The user should be able to side load and use it as they see fit. Even if that means installing an other app store.
The payment processing not sure if that would be needed if users were not locked out of their own hardware. Just install the app directly or an other app store that is not as strict with payment processing.
The problem is that you’re right: it’s not Apple’s phone. If you want, you can jailbreak. Apple has no obligation to help you void your warranty (same as cars and every other device). If you want to argue that them not being obliged to help is unfair, why are we singling out Apple here? Have a Right to Repair law instead.
Good. There's enormous value in the walled garden for the people who want it. Some people reasonably want the ability to install any app they want on their devices, and while I wholeheartedly support them and their wishes, I'm not addressing them here.
As an end user, I know knowing that stuff in Apple's App Store is reasonably vetted. It's not perfect, and when mistakes are made we ready about them here. But for the most part if I install an app that says it'll do X, it'll do X while generally not being to upload unrelated data to North Korea. I'm at a stage in life where I'd rather pay someone to make those investigations and decisions for me than invest the time to do it myself. Again, other people strongly feel otherwise, but that's OK!
As a family member, I have to worry a little less about what apps my kids are running, and have to spend a little less time fixing my older relatives' phones when I go home to visit. This gives me more time to do stuff I actually want to be doing.
As a security person, I have to worry a little less about what apps my coworkers are running, and I know there's a reasonably good sandbox keeping one app's data away from another's. If there were, say, a Facebook-encapsulated app store, I might have zero confidence that the game app they installed through it can't access data in the "add cat pics to your presentation!" app that they also installed through it.
I totally get why people want to have multiple app stores on their phone, and I can't say they're wrong. Still, I'm perfectly happy with the current state of affairs, and have no desire to have Epic and Facebook app stores on my kids' or coworkers' phones that I'm at least a little bit responsible for.
Did you read the article? From the first paragraph...
> The North Dakota state senate voted 36-11 on Tuesday not to pass a bill that would have required app stores to enable software developers to use their own payment processing software and avoid fees charged by Apple and Google.
You can keep your walled garden and still allow app developers to use a third party payment processer.
It likely wouldn't. North Dakota is a small enough market that Apple would probably prefer to just not sell there than change their policies.
Things like tougher vehicle emissions regulations (than imposed at the federal level) work because large states like CA require them, so it ends up being cheaper for manufacturers to just build to the CA standard for all states.
I'm sure a state court lawsuit from some ND developer with a lot of delays and such until it got to the Supreme Court. Probably quite a lot like the sales tax lawsuit Quill Corp. v. North Dakota.
[+] [-] Kranar|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kelnos|5 years ago|reply
And customers from ND would just get pissed at their elected representatives and pressure them to repeal the law. And in the meantime they'd go to another state to buy their iPhone or iPad or have an out-of-state relative buy it for them and mail it to them.
Unfortunately this kind of law needs to be from a state like CA or NY (or quite a few smaller states) for it to be effective.
[+] [-] mcphage|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] s1artibartfast|5 years ago|reply
B is the controversial one.
A provider of a digital application distribution platform may not:
B) Require a developer to use the provider's digital transaction platform or in application payment system as the exclusive means for accepting payment from a user to download the developer's software application, or purchase a digital or physical product or service created, offered, or provided by the developer through a software application.
It seems reasonable that the app store should be able set processing requirements the for apps within the store.
What should be legislated and allowed is the ability of users to download alternative app stores onto their devices if they want to live outside of the walled garden.
https://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/67-2021/documents/21-1044-...
[+] [-] anfilt|5 years ago|reply
It's not apples phone after they sell. The user should be able to side load and use it as they see fit. Even if that means installing an other app store.
The payment processing not sure if that would be needed if users were not locked out of their own hardware. Just install the app directly or an other app store that is not as strict with payment processing.
[+] [-] colejohnson66|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kstrauser|5 years ago|reply
As an end user, I know knowing that stuff in Apple's App Store is reasonably vetted. It's not perfect, and when mistakes are made we ready about them here. But for the most part if I install an app that says it'll do X, it'll do X while generally not being to upload unrelated data to North Korea. I'm at a stage in life where I'd rather pay someone to make those investigations and decisions for me than invest the time to do it myself. Again, other people strongly feel otherwise, but that's OK!
As a family member, I have to worry a little less about what apps my kids are running, and have to spend a little less time fixing my older relatives' phones when I go home to visit. This gives me more time to do stuff I actually want to be doing.
As a security person, I have to worry a little less about what apps my coworkers are running, and I know there's a reasonably good sandbox keeping one app's data away from another's. If there were, say, a Facebook-encapsulated app store, I might have zero confidence that the game app they installed through it can't access data in the "add cat pics to your presentation!" app that they also installed through it.
I totally get why people want to have multiple app stores on their phone, and I can't say they're wrong. Still, I'm perfectly happy with the current state of affairs, and have no desire to have Epic and Facebook app stores on my kids' or coworkers' phones that I'm at least a little bit responsible for.
[+] [-] teruakohatu|5 years ago|reply
> The North Dakota state senate voted 36-11 on Tuesday not to pass a bill that would have required app stores to enable software developers to use their own payment processing software and avoid fees charged by Apple and Google.
You can keep your walled garden and still allow app developers to use a third party payment processer.
[+] [-] Simulacra|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kelnos|5 years ago|reply
Things like tougher vehicle emissions regulations (than imposed at the federal level) work because large states like CA require them, so it ends up being cheaper for manufacturers to just build to the CA standard for all states.
[+] [-] protomyth|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rtrdea|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rvz|5 years ago|reply