I know, but in this case, from what I read, the antitrust authority said something about that in its original ruling, too, but a follow-up court case concerning that ruling scrapped that part of it, implicitly saying the 30% cut is not problematic/the antitrust authority didn’t argue well enough that it is (IANAL, and I don’t think the full history is online, so corrections welcome)

Because of that, I can see why Apple isn’t giving up the golden goose at the moment.