Why do you think Apple is forcing iPod Touch customers to pay up again?

iPhone is a contract deal (as in 2 yr cell contract) and iPod Touch is not. Due to this, the accounting is different and Apple “has to” charge extra for the iPod Touch updates. That’s the official explanation from Apple, which Jobs references in the SDK announcement video stream.

They don’t have to charge for updates. They have to charge for adding features that weren’t originally planned for. For example: if they provide a security update or bug fix they don’t have to charge for that. And they don’t charge for that.

The relevant law is the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The validity of this applying to the iPod Touch is under dispute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes-Oxley_Act

What about in countries that don’t follow this law?

Doesn’t matter, Sarabanes applies to the company that distributes the app, not the consumer itself.

johnpowell, I would like to give you 5 “great answer” points for this. You explained it better than I did in another thread.

I know! iPod touch users having to pay 4 stuff kind of stinks.

Stupid tax laws. From what I understand, iPhone users will have to pay as well when the 2.0 update comes out.

@Spargett

iPhone users don’t have to pay. If they want apps that cost they will have to pay. They won’t have to pay for the ability to add apps like Touch owners will need too.

So how does the iPhone differ? This law is so confusing!

It’s an accounting issue. The iPhone is subscription-based, so they are accounted over a 24-month period. The iPod, however, is not. Under Sarbanes-Oxley, Apple would have to restate old earnings if they added new features to the iPod, but do not have to restate earnings for products that are accounted on a subscription basis.