But that's not how the clauses are written grammatically, which is why I'm unsure. There are two clauses: one about purchases and the second about communication.
The second clause is easiest to deal with. It is:
communicating with customers through points of contact obtained voluntarily
from customers through account registration within the app
This means that the developer can communicate with the user -- using information the user gave them, not information that Apple has to give them. I think we can agree on that one.
The first clause is tougher, and I think there are multiple ways to read it (at least for a non-lawyer... lawyers might read this only one way).
prohibiting developers from (i) including in their apps and their metadata buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to In-App Purchasing
The way that I read it is: developers can include links, buttons, etc that point a user to external purchasing mechanisms, in addition to the existing Apple In-App purchasing.
The other way to read that is (which is how I assume you read it): developers can include links, buttons, etc that point a user to external purchasing mechanisms, as well as allowing non-Apple mechanisms for purchasing inside the app.
Without knowing how the judge has defined In-App purchasing, I'm not sure you can tell which is the right interpretation. The capitalization of it is curious to me, but maybe that's just how they referred to all purchases that happen inside an App, or maybe that's how the Apple App Store managed purchases were referred to.
I'm sure there will be some kind of better legal analysis appearing soon enough (I hope).
The second clause is easiest to deal with. It is:
communicating with customers through points of contact obtained voluntarily from customers through account registration within the app
This means that the developer can communicate with the user -- using information the user gave them, not information that Apple has to give them. I think we can agree on that one.
The first clause is tougher, and I think there are multiple ways to read it (at least for a non-lawyer... lawyers might read this only one way).
prohibiting developers from (i) including in their apps and their metadata buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to In-App Purchasing
The way that I read it is: developers can include links, buttons, etc that point a user to external purchasing mechanisms, in addition to the existing Apple In-App purchasing.
The other way to read that is (which is how I assume you read it): developers can include links, buttons, etc that point a user to external purchasing mechanisms, as well as allowing non-Apple mechanisms for purchasing inside the app.
Without knowing how the judge has defined In-App purchasing, I'm not sure you can tell which is the right interpretation. The capitalization of it is curious to me, but maybe that's just how they referred to all purchases that happen inside an App, or maybe that's how the Apple App Store managed purchases were referred to.
I'm sure there will be some kind of better legal analysis appearing soon enough (I hope).