reporter from several e-book reader engaged

Description

reporter from several e-book reader engaged at App Developers have heard similar complaints. In fact, most of the e-book reader App operational projects within the enterprise, will set up a air jordan 11 retro cheap special working group, responsible for aspects of communication with Apple, “Once the rules have changed, we have not met, then any time may be off the shelf.”Those re-shelves App, are mostly in line with Apple’s rules through “packaging.” Reporter learned from informed sources, after watercress and Taobao have also launched their own reading class App, the initial setting mode is also on the page can be downloaded directly after completion of payment books, but after receiving the Apple rectification notice, modified Finally smooth shelves.Simply put, Apple’s requirements is to ensure that maximize their own interests. Divided according to the principle of the interests of the Apple Store, Apple and the App developers sharing model is 3:7. But for e-book platform, each book have been deducted 30% of the cost, is not a small figure.Many platform providers face of Apple’s terms of Overlord, prefer silence. In the reporter’s interview process, many companies and developers have shown a cautious, worried because this “expose” would offend Apple, which affects the product’s “re-shelves”, there may even direct experience “off the shelf” dilemma “The market is king, unless

 you never want in the Apple store shelves.” In this ecosystem, everything is apple final say.Why has set up such a rule, Apple has had a positive response to this has never been given, but there are people in the industry believe that Apple requires e-book reader category included Apple App Store payment system, but also to facilitate its reading classes may exist overcharged App , or sell pirated books and other acts to regulate the factors exist.Yesterday morning, Yongzhou, Hunan Provincial High air jordan 4 cheap Court on Hui Tang v. Commission case open verdict detention, revocation of First Instance ruled that the judgment Yongzhou Detention Commission to pay compensation and moral damages solatium Hui Tang of 2641.15 yuan. Hui Tang ask for an apology in writing to the demands of the court were not supported.Yesterday morning, Yongzhou, Hunan Provincial High Court on Hui Tang v. Commission case open verdict detention, revocation of First Instance ruled that the judgment Yongzhou Detention Commission to pay compensation and moral damages solatium Hui Tang of 2641.15 yuan. Hui Tang ask for an apology in writing to the demands of the court were not supported.Yongzhou Detention Commission said obey the judgment. Hui Tang said that the ruling “would be acceptable,” but did not receive a written apology for “some regret.” Hui Tang’s attorney Xu Liping analysis, the judge avoided the conflicts, but win

 against Hui Tang is a huge relief. The parties hope, Hui Tang can thus return to normal life.□ JudgmentDetention Commission pay 2641 yuanLast August 2, Yongzhou Detention Detention Committee on Hui Tang made the decision a year and six months, the 10th month of the decision being Hunan Detention Committee of the “administrative reconsideration decision” revoked. Subsequently Hui Tang prosecution lost air jordan 3 retro 88 uk the first trial and then appeal.July 2 this year, Hunan Provincial High Court held a public hearing in the Second Chamber Hui Tang case, finds the basic facts clear, but not in court for sentencing.Yesterday, 9:00, sentencing is still held in the Second Chamber, there are 51 reporters attended as observers. Presiding judge spent about half an hour to read the judgment written revocation of the final determination in the Court of First Instance ruling Yongzhou, Yongzhou revoke detention no compensation committee had made the decision, ruling committee compensation Hui Tang Yongzhou Detention freedom is restricted 9 days compensation 1641.15 yuan (182.35 yuan / day × 9 days) Hui Tang to pay moral damages solatium 1,000 yuan.Yesterday morning, Yongzhou, Hunan Provincial High Court on Hui Tang v. Commission case open verdict detention, revocation of First Instance ruled that the judgment Yongzhou Detention Commission to pay compensation and moral damages solatium Hui