Web payments are not allowed, and fees are virtually enforced… The app developer took the method of forcing in-app payment fees on Korean developers as well as shock Google pulled out an app deletion card. In September last year, the Google In-App Purchase Compulsory Prevention Act, a bill to prevent Googles enforcement of in-app purchases, went into effect and passed the enforcement decree on the 15th of this month.
The IT industry is in shock. This is because, as Google virtually nullifies the enforcement ordinance, each app developer will have to pay a fee of at least 6% and a maximum of 26% even if a third-party payment is used instead of in-app payment in the future. In order not to pay a fee, you must be able to bypass Googles payment system by making a third-party payment on a web page through an external link within the app. A situation has come that has to be done.
Moreover, since Apple is also lukewarm in complying with the law, concerns are raised in the industry that the In-App Payment Compulsory Prevention Act may not be effective.
[Photo = Google Play]
◆Google web payment is not available… An IT platform that is hit by the burden of fees
According to the industry on the 18th, Google said that developers who failed to comply with the payment policy to the Play Console customer center on the 17th will continue until the app complies with the policy, except when an update is required to resolve important security issues from April 1st. It was announced that all apps that do not comply with the policy by June 1 will be removed from Google Play. Google insisted that in-app purchases should be made for digital content apps such as webtoons and web novels, as well as games that had previously enforced mandatory in-app purchases.
This notice announced the rules for non-compliance after the policy was implemented in earnest as the grace period for Googles in-app payment compulsory policy expired on the 31st. In Korea, only in-app payment cannot be requested due to the mandatory prevention of in-app payment law, but UI and other elements should be reorganized so that I-app payment and third-party payment are equally exposed at the payment stage.
If you use a third-party payment, you will have to pay a 6-26% fee, which is 4%p lower than in-app payment. However, the industry estimates that the actual burden will not be reduced when using a third-party payment, as it exceeds 30% when the electronic payment agent fee or credit card fee is added.
Google has warned that apps that do not comply with their IAP policies may be removed from Google Play starting June 1st. [Photo = Google Play Console Help Center]
As such, the use of third-party payment is also burdensome, so app developers argue that Google should allow payments outside of the app, that is, on the web page. In this case, Googles payment system is not used, so there is no need to pay the fee Google requires. This is also the method that app developers have taken in the past.
However, Google has always maintained a negative attitude toward such web payments. And through this policy announcement, it has been clarified that web payments are virtually unacceptable. It is known that the will of Google headquarters was strong in taking measures to make payments only under Googles payment system, regardless of in-app or third-party payments.
The industry is concerned that both the update ban and the app removal action mean that the service should not be served through Google. Many apps, including apps that are hit directly by the in-app payment compulsory policy, such as Naver Webtoon and Kakao Page, are updated at least twice a month. Deleting the app effectively means giving up a huge number of users through the Google App Market.
It is observed that these measures will eventually force app developers to pay fees and use Googles payment system. In fact, as Google did not allow the only way to avoid paying fees, it means that participation in programs organized by Google to reduce the immediate fee burden is effectively forced. Google has set the third-party payment fee at 26% by default, but for app developers participating in the Google Media Experience Program, the fee is lowered to 6% regardless of the transaction amount in the app.
An example of a payment method interface when Google announced the implementation of third-party payment in Korea last year. It is noteworthy that Google In-App Purchase and third-party payment are placed side by side in the same size. [Picture=Google Developer Blog]
As a result, companies operating digital content-related apps, such as Naver and Kakao, took an emergency. Even when Googles in-app payment grace period was about to end, Google was keen on whether to allow web payments, because in the end, it was forced to bear a certain amount of fee burden. In addition, in the case of small and medium-sized companies, it is difficult to establish a third-party payment system on their own, so they have to pay double-digit fees and choose Googles in-app payment.
An industry insider said, “We have no choice but to introduce Googles in-app payment or third-party payment because we have to cry and eat mustard.” He said that even if the act is acknowledged, it will not be easy because Google can appeal.
◆Actually, it was a flimsy method… industry rage
The industry is outraged by Googles de facto transgression of the law. This is a corporation that was enacted to prevent compulsory high-rate in-app payment fees that were constructed by taking advantage of its enormous dominance in the app market market. am.
An industry official said that Google is too unilaterally interpreting the law and telling app developers to accept it blindly. This measure is an interpretation that blocking outlinks does not violate the current law. pinched.
Moreover, Apple, another subject of application of the In-App Purchase Compulsory Prevention Act, has not yet presented a detailed implementation plan to the Korea Communications Commission. Accordingly, Apple has not yet announced specific fee policies in Korea to app developers who have entered the App Store. In fact, even though the bill was aimed at Google and Apple, both companies are not properly complying with the law.
There are also responses that this situation was somewhat foreseen in the first place. This is because the prohibited acts stipulated in the Enforcement Decree are ambiguous.
The Korea Communications Commission (KCC) recently accepted the industrys opinion in the Enforcement Decree and stipulated that not only the act of using a specific payment method but also the part that makes access inconvenient is prohibited as an act. Although the measure was made with the payment of a webpage through outlinks in mind, it is pointed out that there may be differences in interpretation as to whether or not the prohibition of webpage payment can be viewed as an inconvenient act of access. Analysts say that Google has announced strong measures targeting web payments to take advantage of this gap.
An industry insider said that it was a problem in that the in-app payment system created by Google could be set as a default and allowed other payment methods in the meantime, just by looking at the enforcement ordinance. He pointed out that Google seems to have taken action first because the interpretation is not clear.
In this regard, the KCC said it was looking at the situation. A KCC official said that he was aware of the current situation and was discussing with Google. The KCC added that it is also in continuous contact with Apple and is considering whether to initiate a fact-finding investigation into Apple.
