Apple Explains Why It Terminated Epic's Latest Developer Account

[ksj1]

Are you arguing that an US company doing business in the EU and entering a contract in the EU is subject to US law instead of EU law?

Are you arguing that a US company who lost a court case in the US can simply go use their EU subsidiary to skirt the judgment? Something tells me they might find themselves in front of a judge again for contempt.

It doesn't matter anyway. Apple is clearly within their rights not to enter an agreement with a company who broke their previous agreement and is exhibiting the same behavior they showed the last time they broke it.

Epic has clearly shown that they are deceptive and are willing to break agreements they willingly agreed to.

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[Will Co]

Agreed. And if the EU tries to intervene and fails, it could result in a whole new DMA (Mark II)

Not to mention what other countries (UK, USA…) will be tempted to try to enact. Sure as heck this is being watched very closely…

 

[j26]

Are you arguing that a US company who lost a court case in the US can simply go use their EU subsidiary to skirt the judgment? Something tells me they might find themselves in front of a judge again for contempt.

It doesn't matter anyway. Apple is clearly within their rights not to enter an agreement with a company who broke their previous agreement and is exhibiting the same behavior they showed the last time they broke it.

Epic has clearly shown that they are deceptive and are willing to break agreements they willingly agreed to.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Are you arguing US law is supreme to EU law?
It's not.

 

[Zest28]

so the "little guy" who went through the US court system and lost should be supported?
that just doesn't make any sense ...

But the little guy should win, because that makes me feel good!!

 

[cupcakes2000]

a way to completely cut out Apple from the picture

This is exactly how it should be. There should be a way of install things on MY phone without APPLES approval. There should be a way of developing an app and releasing it on iOS without apples approval. You can do this on any other none specialist platform.

 

[bsolar]

what is that supposed to mean?
this discussion is about Epic getting their developer count revoked, and the US court system has ruled that Apple has the right to do so

The point is that the US and EU can say different things, both valid, at the same time. Assuming those are the statements:

• The US gives Apple the right to terminate Epic developer accounts.
• The EU gives Apple the duty to allow Epic access to the platform.

Both these statements can be true at the same time.

Assuming Apple is subject to the latter statement, they would either have to reinstate Epic developer account if that's a requirement to access the platform, or allow for a way to allow access to the platform independently from having said developer account in the first place.

 

[Will Co]

This is exactly how it should be. There should be a way of install things on MY phone without APPLES approval. There should be a way of developing an app and releasing it on iOS without apples approval. You can do this on any other none specialist platform.

You’re not installing onto the hardware. You’re installing it onto the OS. That’s not yours, even though your hardware is.

 

[BaldiMac]

Please look up the concept of "standing" in law. It would be a real catch-22 by your standards for the choices to be:

1. Epic accepts Apple's terms of service, some of which they believe to be illegal. But Epic accepted them so tough s***.
2. Epic never accepts Apple's terms of service, never launches anything on the App Store. Now Epic has no standing in court because they aren't party to any sort of damage from Apple. Epic isn't allowed to sue for relief in court.

This is not how the legal system works. Choice 1 is only way forward for corrective action.

None of that is true. Epic would have standing to sue if they believed that Apple's terms were causing them damage. There was no need to break those terms.

 

[jz0309]

Are you arguing US law is supreme to EU law?
It's not.

do you think the EU will ignore the US court rulings and re-instate Epic's developer account just for EU purposes?
They won't

 

[Will Co]

The point is that the US and EU can say different things, both valid, at the same time. Assuming those are the statements:

• The US gives Apple the right to terminate Epic developer accounts.
• The EU gives Apple the duty to allow Epic access to the platform.

Both these statements can be true at the same time.

Assuming Apple is subject to the latter statement, they would either have to reinstate Epic developer account if that's a requirement to access the platform, or allow for a way to allow access to the platform independently from having said developer account in the first place.

In a nutshell, everyone, this.

 

[ksj1]

Are you arguing US law is supreme to EU law?
It's not.

Really. So companies in the US can simply break contracts, lose court cases here in the US and open a subsidiary somewhere and all is forgiven? Seriously?

These are two US companies, one of which lost a court case in the US that allowed Apple to terminate their developer agreements worldwide. They didn't have to go to court in every country to terminate them because the US company owns them all.

Edit - I should note that the converse is also true with respect to your comment. A US court has already made a judgement regarding two US headquartered companies. Your saying that EU law supersedes US contract law, and that judgement, between two US headquartered companies.

 

[turbineseaplane]

But the little guy should win, because that makes me feel good!!

You should want "little guys" (a subjective definition anyhow) to win because it helps keep playing fields more level and increases competition.

...which is better for you (and all customers)

 

[NOATAK]

I don't like Epic, but cutting them off completely from releasing their own store is also wrong. I'm looking forward to the EU tearing Apple's plans to shreds. It should not be up to Apple to decide who is allowed to publish a third-party store, and certainly not which apps are offered in it. These stores have nothing to do with Apple and obviously it is absolutely unacceptable for Apple to charge fees for them. I hope there's a hefty fine for this. They are practically asking for it.

 

[Zest28]

Are you arguing US law is supreme to EU law?
It's not.

Please, Hermes is very selective on who is allowed to buy a Birkin bag. You got to be a loyal customer for many years.

And good luck buying a Porsche 911GT2 RS without having an extensive collection of previous Porsche cars as they will flat out refuse you as a customer.

If refusing customers was illegal in the EU, Hermes and Porsche wouldn't be able to do this.

 

[bsolar]

Are you arguing that a US company who lost a court case in the US can simply go use their EU subsidiary to skirt the judgment? Something tells me they might find themselves in front of a judge again for contempt.

Which judge? The US judge has no jurisdiction for contractual agreements made in Sweden...

It doesn't matter anyway. Apple is clearly within their rights not to enter an agreement with a company who broke their previous agreement and is exhibiting the same behavior they showed the last time they broke it.

Sure, but this doesn't invalidate their duty under the DMA to provide access to the platform unless they can justify it's a measure "strictly necessary and proportionate" to ensure the security of the platform.

Epic has clearly shown that they are deceptive and are willing to break agreements they willingly agreed to.

Why is that so hard to understand?

The whole point of the DMA is to force Gatekeepers to provide access to the platform in situations they would otherwise not do so voluntarily. If they would provide access voluntarily, there would be no need for a regulation imposing limitations to them.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I don't like Epic, but cutting them off completely from releasing their own store is also wrong. I'm looking forward to the EU tearing Apple's plans to shreds. It should not be up to Apple to decide who is allowed to publish a third-party store, and certainly not which apps are offered in it. These stores have nothing to do with Apple and obviously it is absolutely unacceptable for Apple to charge fees for them. I hope there's a hefty fine for this. They are practically asking for it.

^^ this is the correct take

 

[NewOldStock]

Got to wonder how many Millions $$$ Epic is losing out by not paying fair share 30% to apple.

 

[j26]

do you think the EU will ignore the US court rulings and re-instate Epic's developer account just for EU purposes?
They won't

The issue of the US judgment doesn't arise except as background. The US decision was based on US law. An EU court decision is a European decision based on EU law, and the EU court is not in any way bound by the US decision.

US and European courts regularly come to different conclusions on the same set of facts because the legal framework is different.

 

[cupcakes2000]

You’re not installing onto the hardware. You’re installing it onto the OS. That’s not yours, even though your hardware is.

Well Apple don’t allow me to change the os either, so something has got to give. Besides, eula’s are null in the EU, so it’s a myth what you suggest.

 

[Plutonius]

This is exactly how it should be. There should be a way of install things on MY phone without APPLES approval. There should be a way of developing an app and releasing it on iOS without apples approval. You can do this on any other none specialist platform.

Nobody is making anyone buy an Apple product.

If another product satisfies the consumer's need and Apple does not, the consumer should purchase the other product rather then complaining.

 

[lartola]

So they're effectively banned from the App Store? That doesn't sit right with me....

Not just from the appstore. They’re effectively being banned from creating any apps for apple devices, including apps to be installed via sideloading on iphones in the EU, as even to create those an apple dev account is necessary.

 

[jz0309]

The point is that the US and EU can say different things, both valid, at the same time. Assuming those are the statements:

• The US gives Apple the right to terminate Epic developer accounts.
• The EU gives Apple the duty to allow Epic access to the platform.

Both these statements can be true at the same time.

Assuming Apple is subject to the latter statement, they would either have to reinstate Epic developer account if that's a requirement to access the platform, or allow for a way to allow access to the platform independently from having said developer account in the first place.

your scenario is hypothetical. Do you really believe that the EU will "force" Apple (a US company) to give Epic (a US company) a developer account? If they were to do so, Apple would use the EU court system to fight that and it would be yet another yearlong back and forth ... The EU will be VERY careful to ignore the US rulings and side with Epic on this ...

 

[ThaGoochiestMane]

Got to wonder how many Millions $$$ Epic is losing out by not paying fair share 30% to apple.

Can we stop acting like Apple has always been so consistent with their App Store policies and percentages? Didn't Apple reach agreements to take less than 30% on some of the bigger names in the App Store?

Also, how much $ could Apple be losing?

There are many different platforms to play Fortnite on, many different phones to buy, but there is only 1 Apple ecosystem: and as we've seen from internal discussion about opening iMessage to Android, any migration from iOS to other platforms is viewed as an existential threat to their success.

If these customers are bigger fans of Fortnite than Apple, then they will go to another device to follow the product they're "locked-in" to, leaving Apple's ecosystem behind.

And this says nothing about Epic being better positioned than any other company to actually "own" the metaverse if that ever becomes a thing.

 

[jz0309]

So they're effectively banned from the App Store? That doesn't sit right with me....

that's is basically the outcome of the yearlong legal battle which they lost ...

 

[BaldiMac]

^^ this is the correct take

The correct take is that Epic should follow the clear and unambiguous requirements that Apple requested in their letter in order to have their developer account reinstated. Any disagreements can be resolved in court.