Having read over your arguments, I'm not sure what I could add. I'm not sure how any of it negates anything I said. I sincerely suspect they're too sophisticated for me. I have no legal training.
> Compelling via contractual agreement. This is typically referred to as "forcing" a conditiobn. Classic enforcement of a clause.
What does this mean? Classic enforcement of a clause? What is wrong with enforcing a clause?
> No. That is not what Apple is granting PM. Me putting up a hello world app does not grant me an opportunity to make more (any) revenue. There are additional concerns and limitations.
What does a hello world app have to do with this? We're talking about apps that have plans for sale and provide value. If you read App Store Guidelines, there is a specific term that says apps must provide users some specific, ongoing value. Hello world would be rejected from the App Store on this ground alone.
> Incorrect. If Apple and Apple USERS didn't exist, PM would not be able to be utilized by those users from an Apple device (since nothing else is special about the platform).
I don't understand this at all. Why add the users into the mix? How is nothing else special about the platform? Everything about the platform is totally special.
> Name calling and no-true-scotsman is all heresay or noise.
Could be possible, for sure. I'm prone to that type of thinking, but I'm not sure this is it. There's something pretty unsettling to me about a grown person, operating a very serious business, writing like they didn't understand the rules of something actually very simple. Is that an "ad-hominem", no-true-scotsman maneuver? Maybe? But it seems very relevant that here we are hashing out the merits of legalese arguments; whereas OP is just like "hey we were, like, selling some plans over there on the side and out of nowhere Apple just comes and demands money!!?" Does this person, who runs Proton Mail, live under a rock? Do they not read tech news? More importantly, do they not review the terms of the agreements they enter? Do they expect Apple not to enforce their contracts? Do they enforce contracts? It just seems fake and disingenuous. That's very significant, in my opinion, because fake and disingenuous people are, by and large, fundamentally bad. But that's just what I think.
Will definitely evaluate your analysis carefully, though.
> Compelling via contractual agreement. This is typically referred to as "forcing" a conditiobn. Classic enforcement of a clause.
What does this mean? Classic enforcement of a clause? What is wrong with enforcing a clause?
> No. That is not what Apple is granting PM. Me putting up a hello world app does not grant me an opportunity to make more (any) revenue. There are additional concerns and limitations.
What does a hello world app have to do with this? We're talking about apps that have plans for sale and provide value. If you read App Store Guidelines, there is a specific term that says apps must provide users some specific, ongoing value. Hello world would be rejected from the App Store on this ground alone.
> Incorrect. If Apple and Apple USERS didn't exist, PM would not be able to be utilized by those users from an Apple device (since nothing else is special about the platform).
I don't understand this at all. Why add the users into the mix? How is nothing else special about the platform? Everything about the platform is totally special.
> Name calling and no-true-scotsman is all heresay or noise.
Could be possible, for sure. I'm prone to that type of thinking, but I'm not sure this is it. There's something pretty unsettling to me about a grown person, operating a very serious business, writing like they didn't understand the rules of something actually very simple. Is that an "ad-hominem", no-true-scotsman maneuver? Maybe? But it seems very relevant that here we are hashing out the merits of legalese arguments; whereas OP is just like "hey we were, like, selling some plans over there on the side and out of nowhere Apple just comes and demands money!!?" Does this person, who runs Proton Mail, live under a rock? Do they not read tech news? More importantly, do they not review the terms of the agreements they enter? Do they expect Apple not to enforce their contracts? Do they enforce contracts? It just seems fake and disingenuous. That's very significant, in my opinion, because fake and disingenuous people are, by and large, fundamentally bad. But that's just what I think.
Will definitely evaluate your analysis carefully, though.
Thanks a lot.