Developers Now Required To Share Phone Number and Address On EU App Store (macrumors.com) 84
An anonymous reader quotes a report from MacRumors: Apple today reminded developers that the EU trader requirement in the European Union is now being enforced. Developers who distribute apps in the EU will now need to share information that includes address, phone number, and email address on the EU App Store. Submitting updates for apps on the App Store in the European Union now requires trader information that's added via App Store Connect, with those details shared on each developer's App Store page. App updates can no longer be submitted without trader information, and starting on February 17, 2025, apps that do not have a trader status set will be removed from the App Store in the EU until trader status is provided and verified.
The Digital Services Act (DSA) in the European Union requires Apple to verify and display trader contact information for all "traders" who are distributing apps on the App Store in the European Union. Developers who make money from the App Store through either an upfront purchase price or through in-app purchases are considered traders, regardless of size. Contact information for each developer that is considered a trader will be publicly available, and there will undoubtedly be some developers that are unhappy with the requirement. Independent developers and small companies may not have dedicated business addresses and phone numbers to provide, and will likely be reluctant to provide their personal contact information. You can learn more about the requirements on Apple's website.
The Digital Services Act (DSA) in the European Union requires Apple to verify and display trader contact information for all "traders" who are distributing apps on the App Store in the European Union. Developers who make money from the App Store through either an upfront purchase price or through in-app purchases are considered traders, regardless of size. Contact information for each developer that is considered a trader will be publicly available, and there will undoubtedly be some developers that are unhappy with the requirement. Independent developers and small companies may not have dedicated business addresses and phone numbers to provide, and will likely be reluctant to provide their personal contact information. You can learn more about the requirements on Apple's website.
Re: (Score:3)
But the complain should address relevant parts of the DSA. These are normal requirements for national jurisdictions in the EU. Registering a business is compulsory before any business occurs; providing an address for the business is compulsory upon registration; the formal address and company registration number is already available in databases on the internet. (Whether you registered under your home address is up to you.) Regarding the phone, you definitely should use a separate number for any business ac
Re: (Score:2)
This is a half truth and half lie. While if you want to conduct things as a business most EU nations require entry into national registry (here it's well known as a scam directory, as the moment you register, scammers will basically spam you with various "offers"). But a lot of developers do not in fact produce apps as a business, but as a private person. Usually people make something that helps themselves, and then publish it to help others. And it does.
For example the best public transit planner software
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Bureaucracy gone wild (Score:5, Informative)
From the summary:
> Developers who make money from the App Store through either an upfront purchase price or through in-app purchases are considered traders, regardless of size
Developers who do not make any revenue, are not considered traders.
Or from Apple's announcement itself: "How to know if you are a trader".
> For example, if you're a hobbyist and you developed your app with no intention of commercializing it, you may not be considered a trader.
From the Apple page, requiring the info:
> If you’re a trader, you’ll need to provide your trader information before you can submit your app for review.. -- https://developer.apple.com/ne... [apple.com]
"IF".
Simply posting an app to the EU store, does not make one a trader.
> You must assess whether you are a trader for EU law purposes. Apple can't determine whether you're a trader. ( https://developer.apple.com/he... [apple.com] )
> The DSA defines a trader as “any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession.” -- https://developer.apple.com/he... [apple.com]
> To determine if you're a trader, you should consider a range of non-exhaustive and non-exclusive factors (see those listed on page 2 in the EC’s Guidance), which may include:
> Whether you make revenue as a result of your app, for example if your app includes in-app purchases, or if it's a paid or ad-sponsored app — especially if you're transacting in large volumes;
> Whether you engage in commercial practices towards consumers, including advertising, or promoting products or services;
> Whether you're registered for VAT purposes; and
> Whether you develop your app in connection with your trade, business, craft, or profession—meaning that you’re acting in a professional/business capacity. You're unlikely to be a trader for EU law purposes if you're acting “for purposes which are outside your trade, business, craft, or profession.”
Re: (Score:1)
It's funny that this gets modded informative when while pretending to disagree with me, it ends up agreeing with me:
>The DSA defines a trader as... any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession."
Since when you're making an app, you're acting as a legal person for purposes relating to craft or profession, you're a tr
Re: (Score:2)
No, I literally went to read the relevant legislation. I'm correct. Here, have a gander:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/... [europa.eu]
Relevant part is Article 3, section f:
>‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether it is privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession;
It's very obviously written to be extremely broad and o
Re: (Score:2)
Does Section 4, Article 29 not exclude those who charge little to no fees?
Exclusion for micro and small enterprises
1. This Section shall not apply to providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders that qualify as micro or small enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We could argue back and forth all day about how you're wrong. But we don't need to. The EU has published specific formal guidance on the topic. There's many pages (read section 2.2) clarifying why you are in fact wrong:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/lega... [europa.eu]
Re: (Score:2)
I have in fact read section 2.2. It expands on the interpretation further using both argumentation and court precedent. It does not narrow it at any point in any relevant way to this discussion.
My guess is that you went through cited examples, but missed last sentence in third paragraph on page 27 which comes before said examples that specifically delineates that definitions that follow are non-exhaustive and non-exclusive:
>The determination of the status by the national court must take into account diff
Re: (Score:2)
All of those criteria include either "seller" or "sale" except for "the number, amount and frequency of transactions". Your example of someone making an app available for free does not involve any seller, sale, or transaction. And to your point raised in another subthread about a "natural person who is acting for purposes relating to his profession", the reasonable position for a court to take would be that his purpose for acting is to help people use public transport efficiently or effectively, which (unle
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect. Expanded definitions criteria include that. But that is merely an expansion of the full meaning, not entire meaning. This is again why the caveat mentioned above is present before said expansion examples are listed.
Again, this is the definition from the legal text is:
>any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade
Re: (Score:2)
You have chosen a poor example since a person who earns no money from an app will not have to supply name and telephone number as they are not a "trader".
Re: (Score:2)
Apples page explictly state that simply posting to the EU store does not make one a trader. "For example, if you're a hobbyist and you developed your app with no intention of commercializing it, you may not be considered a trader.". Yes. People can read the article, and not a summary that omits all the details of what is, and is not a trader with respect to the EU law, and to Apple's enforcement of the law as written. Apple states that it cannot determine if any developer is a trader under the law. A
Re: (Score:2)
Except that of course, this doesn't work because of the specific text of DSA and how Apple itself phases it. Because to be a "hobbyist", you must not practice "your craft or profession" while making the app.
Almost all people who make software for free also practice or have practiced it as a trade or craft. Which makes them "traders" as far as DSA is concerned. You quoted relevant text at me, without comprehending what it says just above.
Re: (Score:2)
I recommend stopping reading Apple's take and going straight to the law, as Apple itself immediately inserts a caveat that it doesn't actually know, is not offering any legal advice, and recommends reading the law or finding a legal professional to do it for you to figure out if you're a trader.
Relevant law is DSA:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/... [europa.eu]
Relevant part is Article 3, section f:
>‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether it is privately or publicly ow
Re: (Score:2)
Section 4, Article 29 - the part that also defines the "Traceability of traders" (IE: providing name, phone, address), starts with the following exception:
Exclusion for micro and small enterprises
1. This Section shall not apply to providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders that qualify as micro or small enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC.
IANAL, but I'm going to trust Apple's take on it that you don't need to provide such info if you make no sales.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You effectively agreed with everything I said, but tried to put a maximally positive spin on it, which is actually completely inappropriate.
Yes, turns out that being an egomaniacal nutbag bragging about de facto eliminating AI development from EU through being "first in AI regulation" and issuing illegal public threats in public on twitter didn't endear him to the head of the Commission that had to try to clean those messes and defend him to Council when they started asking what is going in in Commission th
This was not already a requirement? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Came here to say the same thing. I'm pretty sure that Google has required this for many years. Even for the Chrome Web Store they do.
No wonder there is so much malware on iOS.
Re: (Score:3)
There are about 6,000 people who downloaded and hopefully enjoyed my app. I don't know anything about any of them. Nothing. Nada. And I don't care. Don't want my app, don't download it, or delete it.
Until you have evidence otherwise, STFU.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the apps I used know everything about me - my phone number, name location etc..
Only if you choose to share it with them. I don't.
Makes sense (Score:5, Informative)
That way malicious and grossly negligent developers can actually be identified.
Re: (Score:1)
That way malicious and grossly negligent developers can actually be identified.
But why does it need to be publicly available? I mean, I guarantee that asshole will use this info to harass people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the US you register in a particular state. I can't say for all 50 but when I created an LLC in California that information was certainly freely available online in an easy to find location with a sufficiently acceptable search engine built in. Open to anyone with a browser.
My assumption is all 50 states have their own version of the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but the address on file there can be your registered agent. You only need to provide an agent's address to register a corporation, and not yours. Ancillary info such as an Email address or Telephone number is also not necessary, but if you chose to put it you can also put your registered agent's info.
The agent's only job is to be served with legal paperwork from the state, or a court if your business is being sued. And they cannot be contacted for any other purpose (would reject the call).
The f
Re: (Score:2)
As if No-Call-Lists and similar have ever been effectively enforced.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Like it does with WHOIS? This will be trivial to get around, as below.
Easy to get around. (Score:3)
Burner app phone number(s), online po boxes, and plenty of places to stand up and abandon such an email address. Effectively useless law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To set up trader information for Apple, you can do the following:
Finally! (Score:2)
Another use for that 1-800-EAT-SHIT number.
Nope, not true (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they don't have business contact details, how are they in business?
Presumably you don't need to provide this information if your app is free and have no in-app purchasing.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite true. (Score:5, Informative)
The EU Directive requires all earning revenue on a digital service, via the Digital Services Act.
The developer must " notify the name, postal address, email address and telephone number of their legal representative to the Digital Services Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established."
Failure to provide full information is subject to fines, for failing to provide adequate direct contact to reach the developer.
Failure to provide verified name, address, and phone number, or failure to publish the information clearly, is in direct violation of EU law.
More specifically, Article 30:
Providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders shall ensure that [...] they have obtained the following information, applicable to the trader:
1 (a) the name, address, telephone number and email address of the trader;
7 The provider of the online platform allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders shall make the information referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), [...] available on its online platform to the recipients of the service in a clear, easily accessible and comprehensible manner
Re: Quite true. (Score:2)
What about free apps that don't "enter in a contract"?
Sure, if you can pay for the app, you should be able to know who you are paying, but for free apps, ads supported or not, I don't see why that would be required.
If apple requires that also far free apps, that looks too me like malicious compliance to fuck even more with the EU, and/or to drive solo developpers and hobbyists away even more and should be punished.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Under EU rules, businesses do not have consumer protections. You are referring to consumer protections.
"Trader" status under DSA is a bit weird because it also includes "people practicing their profession or craft" at least according to Apple. So professionals who are not a business. Probably another one of the "poorly written policy/regulation/legislation" issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Transactions do not need to be of commercial nature. There are listed examples in the past court hearings in the expanded definitions where a non-profit charity, a consumer and even a public entity may qualify as a trader.
Re: (Score:2)
Blatant lying. These are words of the Commission. Quoted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You:
>at least not under EU rules
Me:
>this is how it is under EU rules
You:
>But under Dutch rules...
Yes, individual nations may add additional protections. Under EU rules however, your initial chosen metric such protections only cover consumers, not businesses.
Re: (Score:2)
Slight correction to my previous post, I went to read the relevant regulation because I trust Apple with exactly nothing:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/... [europa.eu]
Article 3, section f:
‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether it is privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession;
So yes, legislation itself is written eithe
Dom names / whois (Score:4, Interesting)
Wasn't it the EU that basically forced whois records to hide the address and phone number of the registrant, even when a domain is owned by a business?
I find it extremely shady when a company uses a domain privacy service, a legitimate business should be contactable and locatable, so it makes sense for this information to be available before you acquire any monetized app. They should require that business domains display such information too, and only allow hiding that information for personally owned domains.
Re:Dom names / whois (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Does ICANN (or various registrars) have a personal/business field in their DNS data?
Re: (Score:1)
Does ICANN (or various registrars) have a personal/business field in their DNS data?
"whois" data, and yes, they do, it's been that way since the 80s
Contact fields are by a persons role in managing the domain, they aren't specifically separated by business/personal.
For instance "owner" is for who has ultimate control over the domain and its other roles, and this is for either a business or personal contact.
"technical" is often set when someone else is doing the tech work, often the hosting company, which if the domain is owned by an individual will now cause a mix of both business and perso
Re: (Score:2)
"whois" data, and yes, they do, it's been that way since the 80s
OK. I misstated my question. Does DNS have a field signifying that an entry is either a personally or business owned domain?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It only takes one person in the EU to go argue their business contact is actually personal, and then it becomes an expensive legal fight for icann with a real chance they could lose.
That is not at all how it works.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Whois data assumed that all domains would be owned by businesses, which was quite obvious back in the 90s.
Re: (Score:2)
Doxxing / swatting (Score:3)
Re:Doxxing / swatting (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually the main thing these registries are used for are business scams. Have been for a long time, which is why a lot of hobbyists don't want to register as a registered business.
Essentially there are companies in EU that make their living scamming small businesses by going through registries and then sending fake invoices for supposedly small business related services, as well as make threatening calls that "you need to pay this much for your registration (on our shitty website that actually has nothing to do with official business registry) to be valid".
Even in small nations like mine, this industry is assessed as being worth at least tens of millions each year. And it's completely legal, because businesses do not enjoy consumer protections, and these are just considered hard B2B sales tactics as long as they avoid a handful of things that are actually illegal in that space.
Re: (Score:2)
These rules seem mostly to benefit assholes who want to doxx and harass random small time app/game devs. Beyond a contact email, there's not really much need for a platform to post devs address and phone. We don't need to empower the swatters.
My first thought was that if a small-time dev starts to gain some decent traction with an app, it'd make it much easier for the big-boys to contact for purchase, then harass the ever loving shit out of them by spamming them into oblivion via all contact routes required. Same result, just from different directions.
Re: Doxxing / swatting (Score:2)
Swatting is a US thing. No such thing as 'swat teams' in EU.
Also, no scam or robocalls in EU either, unlike luckyo claims in their first post.
OK, I'm lying. I got one unsolicited phone call (some 10ish years ago) by some "Peter from Microsoft" with an obvious Indian accent who eventually wanted me to install Teamviewer. I say, eventually, cos I had nothing at hand that morning and kept the sucker busy for the best part of an hour. At least that Peter didn't annoy any others all that time, and I had my giggl
Not a problem (Score:2)
iOS users in the EU can now sideload apps, can't they? So, if you can't publish your app on the Apple store, publish it on your own webpage.
Re: Not a problem (Score:3)
Where it will be seen by absolutely noone...
Exactly like in the appstore, in fact.
Oh No! (Score:2)
So it's perfectly fine for an app developer to get my phone number, email, address info, and far more than that from the App Store or directly from my device when I use their app; but it's not fine for me to get the developer's contact information when I pay them for the app in case I have a support need?
Are these developers too stupid to use some kind of rented postbox, a $5/mo Google Workspace account for a business email box, and a free Google Voice number as a business number?
I mean they're trying to ac
Re: (Score:2)
So it's perfectly fine for an app developer to get my phone number, email, address info, and far more than that from the App Store or directly from my device when I use their app; but it's not fine for me to get the developer's contact information when I pay them for the app in case I have a support need?
Are these developers too stupid to use some kind of rented postbox, a $5/mo Google Workspace account for a business email box, and a free Google Voice number as a business number?
I mean they're trying to act like a business by taking money for software, so maybe act like a business. I'm sure the taxing authority would like to know about it, and get this information too.
Exactly!
I gotta wonder about a supposed Business that wants to hide its identity; especially since it is so easy to set up a "Digital Presence" for Business Purposes.