What catches my eye, other than the "person to person experiences" and game streaming changes is the complete removal of the following clause in section 3.1.3(b) "Multiplatform Services":
>You must not directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods must not discourage use of in-app purchase.
To me, this was the most draconian rule in the entire agreement since it governed how you could communicate with your customers outside of your app (such as on your own website). IANAL, but this change seems to allow mentioning the 30% Apple cut to your users and nudging them towards alternatives.
"3.1.3(f) Free Stand-alone Apps: Free apps acting as a stand-alone companion to a paid web based tool (eg. VOIP, Cloud Storage, Email Services, Web Hosting) do not need to use in-app purchase, provided there is no purchasing inside the app, or calls to action for purchase outside of the app."
This seems to imply the original Hey app would have been legal now?
This is literally racketeering. Apple uses their market influence to create a completely unnecessary 'store' for their apps to demand a % of your business.
https://web.archive.org/web/diff/20200911173859/202009011909...
What catches my eye, other than the "person to person experiences" and game streaming changes is the complete removal of the following clause in section 3.1.3(b) "Multiplatform Services":
>You must not directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods must not discourage use of in-app purchase.
To me, this was the most draconian rule in the entire agreement since it governed how you could communicate with your customers outside of your app (such as on your own website). IANAL, but this change seems to allow mentioning the 30% Apple cut to your users and nudging them towards alternatives.