Oh boy. It's been a nasty few days between the two of these companies. Grabbing up percentages of revenue share that could really make a person throw-down a pan of cheesecake. There's a lot people that like cheesecake, so I'm sure the mess is huge.
The morals of revenue sharing is nothing new, and surely an extremely touch subject. Who gets what for what they did, and how often they get it for what they're doing, or did.
So I'm in the stance of whoever does the most work deserves the most share cut. This dates all the way back to developers, and the like. Developers aren't always paid what they deserve, and that's horrible. They spend days developing software for a captain and get barely anything out of it. I'm sure some companies generously pay their developers though, or else said developers wouldn't continue to work for the company, because the benefits would be lack.
There is the person or team of people that navigate the company in specific ways to receive the best results. Those people deserve some good benefits. You may have developers, but those developers won't make anything if there's no one to promote their work. So what do you do? Give more benefits/money to the developers and hope for the best? Even it out when there is someone to promote their work? What?
The other way that percentage shares work is by providing a service to someone, and then taking a cut of their revenue because you helped them get their product out there. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. There is, however, something wrong when you dig too deep into their revenue -- For something you didn't have any part in.
Look, all I'm saying is, don't be greedy. It hurts the end-users.