Apple Demanded Sales Information on 30,000+ Games From Steam in Ongoing Lawsuit With Epic Games

[Ethosik]

And Microsoft charges you (the developer) to release free Xbox apps?

Similar way that Apple charges you to make free apps with their $100 fee.

There are no fees to apply to ID@Xbox, to submit a game to certification, publish, or update your games. There is a very modest one-time cost associated with development for the Universal Windows Platform.

Independent Developers Program for Xbox One | Xbox

The ID@Xbox program enables qualified game developers of all sizes to unleash their creativity by self-publishing digital games on Xbox.

www.xbox.com

 

[Abazigal]

Apple’s gonna have to climb pretty high on their cross to get the non-cultists on their side on this one.

It’s not the customers Apple has to win over in their court case. It’s the judge, so all gloves are off.

Epic started this fight, and t’s clear from the recent lawsuit in Dakota that this “guerrilla tactics” is not going to stop anytime soon, so I don’t blame Apple for doing whatever it takes to win.

Once and for all.

 

[playtech1]

They do, though - very much so. Dominant market position equates to the same - it's called a natural monopoly. Just ask pre-1983 AT&T about that, or De Beers Diamonds. Both have "competitors" and both were (and are, for De Beers' case) monopolies. Valve also maintains a Most Favored Nations clause so they get the best terms with publishers across the board.

I would say that AT&T was a natural monopoly, because the barriers to entry involved in running telephone lines to every home made it impractical for competition to arise. It would also be an arguably pointless use of resources to run duplicate telephone networks across the country. Other utility suppliers are usually viewed as natural monopolies for the same reason. De Beers wasn't a natural monopoly, it was a 'normal' kind of monopoly achieved through its business strategy. I don't see Apple or Valve being natural monopolies and Valve isn't a monopoly at all.

I do think both Apple and Valve have dominant positions in their respective marketplaces of PC games and mobile apps, plus Apple has a monopoly in the iOS app market.

A dominant player in a market isn't necessarily a problem, but it can become one if that dominant position is abused, which is what Epic is essentially saying Apple is doing by forcing payment processing to be done via its service with a 30% cut. There's a similar argument to be made by Spotify and the like that Apple Music etc. also get an unfair leg-up by effectively not having to pay that 30%, although I'm not sure that this is central to Epic's case.

I imagine Valve is of particular interest to Apple because Valve operates on an open platform with a reasonable amount of competitors (GoG, Epic Games Store, Xbox, Origin, Uplay, etc.) and still charges something similar to Apple. Apple would love to be able to say that 30% is about the 'market rate' for similar services on an open platforms so adopting it on their closed platform (to the exclusion of competition) is not an abuse of its position.

A problem with this for Apple is that Epic's cut on its store is 12%, which suggests competition on an open platform can drive down prices for developers.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

plus Apple has a monopoly in the iOS app market.

Of course they do.

A problem with this for Apple is that Epic's cut on its store is 12%, which suggests competition on an open platform can drive down prices for developers.

To me, it suggests that Epic is doing less so they charge less. Makes sense.

 

[0423MAC]

They do, though - very much so. Dominant market position equates to the same - it's called a natural monopoly. Just ask pre-1983 AT&T about that, or De Beers Diamonds. Both have "competitors" and both were (and are, for De Beers' case) monopolies. Valve also maintains a Most Favored Nations clause so they get the best terms with publishers across the board.

No, they don’t. Anyone is able to develop a distribution platform on windows.

The only argument supporting this stance is if Windows came with steam preinstalled giving them a significant advantage. Obviously not the case. One is perfectly able to install games more conveniently via the Microsoft store or go through extra steps on other platforms competing for your dollars.

Those thinking Valve and Apple are the same need to get real and put the fanboy shades down.

 

[Ethosik]

No, they don’t. Anyone is able to develop a distribution platform on windows.

The only argument supporting this stance is if Windows came with steam preinstalled giving them a significant advantage. Obviously not the case. One is perfectly able to install games more conveniently via the Microsoft store or go through extra steps on other platforms competing for your dollars.

Those thinking Valve and Apple are the same need to get real and put the fanboy shades down.

That is actually the point Apple is trying to make with this. Fortnite is a video game. You have PlayStation, Xbox, Switch, Steam, Epic Games Store, any other Windows distribution method, any Linux or macOS distribution method. This is a video game market not an iOS market. Apple is trying to say Fortnite is available elsewhere, because Epic is saying Apple owns a monopoly on the iOS Apps. But this is a video game. Again, you cannot make the market so narrow. Every single company would be subject to monopoly if this goes south because, the very nature of your business is creating your own product. Therefore, pretty much every single company owns their own market and would technically be a monopoly depending on how narrow you make the market.

This will set a precedent that eventually might lead to game consoles being forced to open up. After all, if we make the market narrow enough, they have monopolies in their own market.

 

[9927036]

Apple’s monopoly on cell phones? Of which there are many competitors with similar quality that allow sideloading?

I guess you know better than the DoJ. Maybe you could go help them out?

 

[Janschi]

Some of y’all’s comments smell like EPIC employee

 

[BuffaloTF]

No, they don’t. Anyone is able to develop a distribution platform on windows.

The only argument supporting this stance is if Windows came with steam preinstalled giving them a significant advantage. Obviously not the case. One is perfectly able to install games more conveniently via the Microsoft store or go through extra steps on other platforms competing for your dollars.

Those thinking Valve and Apple are the same need to get real and put the fanboy shades down.

Yes, they do. The ability of one to create a distribution platform does not disqualify this when you simply cannot compete and the market terms are basically set by Valve through their Most-Favored Nations clause in their distribution contracts -- in fact, the very thing you mention of them being on Windows as a platform is what makes them a monopoly... you can't have a monopoly on your own product, it's an impossibility. Also, most stores that you think "compete" with Steam... sell what? Steam keys.

AT&T had competition, what do you think SPRINT stands for? GTE? US Telecom? Standard Oil had competition. PureOil/Texaco/Sun/Shell/Citgo. Having competition does not mean one isn't a monopoly. And being a monopoly does not mean one is doing anything wrong, as we've come to learn with the colossal failures of the Standard Oil and AT&T breakups.

You know who isn't a monopoly though? Apple. Because, once again, you cannot have a monopoly of your own product. It's yours.

 

[gnasher729]

I guess the real argument Apple are making here is that as Steam is the dominant store for games, the focus should be put on them and Valve's monopoly on selling video games.

I think that guess is wrong. Apple doesn't mind Valve doing whatever they like. But Epic claims that Apple has a monopoly, and looking at Steam's data could be good evidence that Apple hasn't. Epic also claims that Apple charges too much, and looking at Steam's data could show that Apple doesn't. I'm sure Apple doesn't mind Valve making good money, but if Valve has evidence that Apple doesn't make more than others, that would be helpful for Apple.

 

[gnasher729]

Presumably the lawyers are not looking at this information for academic interest, they will be wanting to use the information they glean in the pleadings in the case, which Apple and Epic will certainly see (and which may well also become public - that won't be in Valve's control).

Apple may be once removed from direct access to the spreadsheets or whatever (assuming you are correct as to how the process would work), but I cannot see how Apple can be entirely divorced from gaining insight from that data, otherwise what would be the point of the whole exercise?

If a court says that this information is confidential, then nobody except lawyers will see it. Valve's lawyers would hand the information to Apple's lawyers. If it is useful for Apple (which Apple's lawyers decide without asking Apple), Apple's lawyers would show it to the judge and the judge would show it to Epic's lawyers if needed. And if any of these lawyers show the data to anyone else, like Apple's lawyer saying to Tim Cook "you might be interested in this", or talk about it, they would be in so much trouble... They would be fired on the spot, lose their license, never be hired anywhere ever again. The law firm doing it would be Valve's ex law firm, or Apple's ex law firm, or Epic's ex law firm.

In a perfect world, true but you know that info will be leaked, regardless of the ethics, legality or penalty.

Whoever leaks this will be unemployable as a lawyer for the rest of their lives.

 

[McG2k1]

It’s not the customers Apple has to win over in their court case. It’s the judge, so all gloves are off.

Epic started this fight, and t’s clear from the recent lawsuit in Dakota that this “guerrilla tactics” is not going to stop anytime soon, so I don’t blame Apple for doing whatever it takes to win.

Once and for all.

Sean Connery voice: thank you for proving my point.

 

[ruka.snow]

A problem with this for Apple is that Epic's cut on its store is 12%, which suggests competition on an open platform can drive down prices for developers.

The Epic store does very little for their cut. They don't even pay regional taxes for you so you would have to do this yourself which is very costly. If you consider going Epic, you might as well use Fastspring or go it completely alone so you have more money to cover the added costs of not being on Steam, Goggle Play, or the AppStore.

 

[Abazigal]

The Epic store does very little for their cut. They don't even pay regional taxes for you so you would have to do this yourself which is very costly. If you consider going Epic, you might as well use Fastspring or go it completely alone so you have more money to cover the added costs of not being on Steam, Goggle Play, or the AppStore.

This.

It’s easy to charge less when you are doing less.

 

[Porthos38]

I think what Apple is asking for seems a bit much, and my first thought was they wanted that info more for themselves than anything to with the case.

With that said, Epic is 100% competing with Steam, they are constantly giving games away to try to lure people into using the Epic Games launcher. (maybe that stopped but it was something they did for at least 6 months)

No, epic still give way game. I just got Rage 2 for free

 

[pankajdoharey]

The solution could be both exchange Games sales data with each other. Both can benefit.

 

[Haiku_Oezu]

I don’t think they get it.

Yes, Steam takes a 30% cut but you don’t NEED to release your games on Steam.
Is it the de facto marketplace for PC games? Arguably so, but it’s absolutely not necessary for your game to be on Steam to run on a PC.

I really don’t understand what Apple is trying to obtain from this, it seems like it would just prove Epic’s point that the App Store could thrive even if it wasn’t the only way to run software on iOS. Just how Steam is obscenely successful despite Epic Game Store and other marketplaces being a thing.

Something they’re absolutely right about by the way. I have no sympathy for Epic and how they’re going about doing this, but I’ll be damned if I don’t agree iOS would benefit from allowing sideloading.
Lock it down as much as you want, ****, void my warranty if that’s what it’s gonna take. I understand the risks and it’s not like the App Store review process can find a properly hidden payload inside an app.

 

[0423MAC]

I don’t think they get it.

Yes, Steam takes a 30% cut but you don’t NEED to release your games on Steam.
Is it the de facto marketplace for PC games? Arguably so, but it’s absolutely not necessary for your game to be on Steam to run on a PC.

I really don’t understand what Apple is trying to obtain from this, it seems like it would just prove Epic’s point that the App Store could thrive even if it wasn’t the only way to run software on iOS. Just how Steam is obscenely successful despite Epic Game Store and other marketplaces being a thing.

Something they’re absolutely right about by the way. I have no sympathy for Epic and how they’re going about doing this, but I’ll be damned if I don’t agree iOS would benefit from allowing sideloading.
Lock it down as much as you want, ****, void my warranty if that’s what it’s gonna take. I understand the risks and it’s not like the App Store review process can find a properly hidden payload inside an app.

They don’t get it. That’s why I stopped responding.

The leap to try and compare what Apple is doing with the App Store and Valve with steam is absurd. It’s not even remotely the same.

 

[cmaier]

Watching the hearing now. Judge is going to order Valve to produce information to Apple.

 

[cmaier]

They don’t get it. That’s why I stopped responding.

The leap to try and compare what Apple is doing with the App Store and Valve with steam is absurd. It’s not even remotely the same.

The point, as explained by Apple and as the Judge agreed to, is that Epic’s theory is that if Apple allows additional app stores, it will decrease costs for software. Apple‘s point is that it’s market experts want to test that theory by seeing what happened when Epic started to compete with Steam, by comparing the costs of apps that are sold on both stores prior to and after Epic entered the market. If the price of software did not decrease, it undermines an argument that Epic is alleging as the basis for its lawsuit.

 

[McG2k1]

The point, as explained by Apple and as the Judge agreed to, is that Epic’s theory is that if Apple allows additional app stores, it will decrease costs for software. Apple‘s point is that it’s market experts want to test that theory by seeing what happened when Epic started to compete with Steam, by comparing the costs of apps that are sold on both stores prior to and after Epic entered the market. If the price of software did not decrease, it undermines an argument that Epic is alleging as the basis for its lawsuit.

If that’s all they’re trying to do then they should be able to do that with sales information from any unrelated source, like say motorhome sales. Or hang gliders. Apple is clearing trying to more than you are grasping here.

 

[cmaier]

If that’s all they’re trying to do then they should be able to do that with sales information from any unrelated source, like say motorhome sales. Or hang gliders. Apple is clearing trying to more than you are grasping here.

I watched the hearing today. I heard what Apple said and I heard what the judge said. I know exactly what they are trying to do.

And it’s ludicrous to suggest that hang gliders would be as informative as comparing to another market, also involving software, where epic, the plaintiff in this case, was also a new entrant.

 

[Cereal_Killer]

okay apparently everyone here needs to be educated on Apple. while i am a avid lover of apple products, not so much with the company.

First there really isn’t any lawsuit from apple that makes them the good guy. as long as Tim cook has run things everything has been about profit margins and his wallet; everything else that seems great is just marketing; not reality.

Fun Fact #1 - apple repair programs only happen bc Apple was sued by someone; apple never does this own there own (except for when jobs was around there was atleast 1 instance but tim isn’t steve!! more the opposite)

Fun Fact #2 - Atleast for all macbooks, especially the pros there have been made with known manufacturer flaws for years the results in there poor performance, gpu defects, and constant intermittent hangs. This has been confirmed by electrical and apple engineers in a apple support case, before they sabotaged it to hide the evidence; since it would cost them millions to fix a problem that could only be partly fixed. part of the flaws are in the logic board and occurs when it gets to hot and then remains permanently regardless of the temps; essentially exceeding 180 breaks something in the logic board and the other is with intel chips. its been tested with 15 logic boards that all did the same thing in a factory environment.

it would be wise to remove that euphoria vale we all see apple as with there aesthetic design to look pretty but have hidden rotted secrets on the inside.

remember marketing is made to make you be wowed and lured to spend its a half-truth , reality is the whole hard truth, what really is there in front of you, what your really buying and apple spends a lot of money hiding it from everyone.

 

[I7guy]

okay apparently everyone here needs to be educated on Apple. while i am a avid lover of apple products, not so much with the company.

First there really isn’t any lawsuit from apple that makes them the good guy. as long as Tim cook has run things everything has been about profit margins and his wallet; […]

Post starts off bad and devolves from there. If you believe Steve Jobs didn’t care about making apple money or margins, you’re believing some urban legend. It’s the responsibility of a ceo to care about such things. It’s interesting how one went from that wasn’t Steve’s concern to 100% that’s the only aspect of the job Tim cares about.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

while i am a avid lover of apple products

While I am an avid lover of Apple products, here is why I hate Apple products... did I capture that correctly?