Apple Files Appeal in Epic Games Lawsuit, Asks to Delay App Store Changes

[MhaelK]

You can't have a monopoly of your own product. This was proven when someone wanted to make a business out of OS X devices (Pystar) and the was also decided in the case here. A monopoly of your own product is pretty much 100% guaranteed and expected. Your goal as someone wanting to create a company is to create something unique. If you really want to make your argument THAT NARROW, then everything can be considered a monopoly. Microsoft and Sony have monopolies on what games are allowed on PS5/Xbox. I cannot fire up Visual Studio, write a game, put it on my website and direct PS5 and XBox users to download it. It needs approval and licensing fees from Sony/Microsoft. Therefore, they own the Game Distribution in their respective consoles. Regardless if I can sell it at Target or not because I still need to go through Sony/Microsoft no matter what I do.

Its so ridiculous to have people constantly call Apple as being a monopoly, yet my friend has an Android phone, can get the same critical apps and have NOTHING to do with Apple AT ALL.

Why don't you people put at least 10% of the effort here that you want to bring down the big bad Apple and go after the true monopolies here - ISP. I only have one choice Spectrum. And it is HORRIBLE. Why not go after them huh? Gigabit internet and its just a joke, rarely works, constantly needs to be restarted or the cables outside repaired or dealing with their own messed up issues on THEIR side.

Apple is in no way a monopoly, it was confirmed by legal cases twice now including this one.

Look into network externalities, the world is changing and so needs the laws which protects against exploitation. Apples user base have reached such critical mass that “basically” every e-business outside the iOS wall cant ignore getting access to iOS anymore, which means Apple can act as monopoly with regards to the outside world When selling access to the iOS user.

Sure, your horrible ISP issue is a bigger problem for YOU. But for the rest of the world there are bigger problems (EU already has laws on ISPs). Im not saying some monopolies are better than others, but it sure sounds like you are. So to quote your own words: Spectum obviously has successed in creating a unique product where you live - so why shouldn’t you just take you own advise a just pay the price Spectrum demands Or move? If you just put at least 10% of the effort that you use to defend Apple, into defending Spectrum then that would likely be your own conclusion 😉

Apple is under ongoing investigation for wrong business practices in other parts of the world.

 

[mrochester]

Look into network externalities, the world is changing and so needs the laws which protects against exploitation. Apples user base have reached such critical mass that “basically” every e-business outside the iOS wall cant ignore getting access to iOS anymore, which means Apple can act as monopoly with regards to the outside world When selling access to the iOS user.

Sure, your horrible ISP issue is a bigger problem for YOU. But for the rest of the world there are bigger problems (EU already has laws on ISPs). Im not saying some monopolies are better than others, but it sure sounds like you are. So to quote your own words: Spectum obviously has successed in creating a unique product where you live - so why shouldn’t you just take you own advise a just pay the price Spectrum demands Or move? If you just put at least 10% of the effort that you use to defend Apple, into defending Spectrum then that would likely be your own conclusion 😉

Apple is under ongoing investigation for wrong business practices in other parts of the world.

But nothing about apple’s business stops a competitor to iOS from emerging. Apple doesn’t prevent developers from making apps for a multitude of different operating systems if another manufacturer decided to compete with apple in that regard. The remedy is not to penalise apple, it’s to increase competition in the smartphone operating system market so that no one platform has control and developers have a number of different platforms to develop for.

 

[Wildkraut]

Well here in the US they were found to not haven broken any laws. One point wasn't overturned and now is being appealed. Things are not working the way you think they are.

Not really, the EPIC case still on the table, both didn’t win, but Apple got the first hit. Apple has been forced to make changes which they wouldn’t do without the South Korea antitrust and EPIC trial.
In addition to that, even in the U.S. there are additional antitrust investigations…

US antitrust bills on the way, one of which targets Apple- 9to5Mac

House Democrats are reportedly set to announce no fewer than five US antitrust bills, one of which would in part target Apple's App Store ...

9to5mac.com

Remind me again how the Ireland "tax evasion" trial went?

Well, in the Ireland tax fight it was somehow okay that Apple won, simply because they used an existing „currently“ legal method to circumvent tax payments. These tax avoidance methods are known since many years, nations never did something against it, but doesn’t mean that’s morally right. Yeah i know many companies do this.

Anyway, this is also about to change, new laws and regulations will be launched soon here in the EU to stop these big corps shady tax avoidance methods. Tax should be paid where products are bought.

 

[theotherphil]

Stop saying the judge decided they weren't a monopoly, that's a blatant lie, she said she was making no such decision and that only Epic failed to prove it 🙄🙄🙄

Sorry what? Innocent until proven guilty right? Is that not how the law works?

Or is Apple guilty because a bunch of haters on the internet said it was so? Maybe these people should have been the ones taking apple to court, and not the lawyers Epic hired?



Let’s recap what was actually said:

The threshold of market share for finding a prima facie case of monopoly power is generally no less than 65% market share. See Image Tech. Servs. II, 125 F.3d at 1206 (“Courts generally require a 65% market share to establish a prima facie case of market power.”); Hunt- Wesson, 627 F.2d at 924–25 (“market shares on the order of 60 percent to 70 percent have supported findings of monopoly power”).592 A more conservative threshold would require a market share of 70% or higher for monopoly power. See Kolon Indus. Inc. v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 748 F.3d 160, 174 (4th Cir. 2014) (“Although there is no fixed percentage market share that conclusively resolves whether monopoly power exists, the Supreme Court has never found a party with less than 75% market share to have monopoly power

In Count 1, Epic Games claims that Apple has a monopoly in the “iOS App Distribution Market” and has unlawfully maintained the monopoly by prohibiting iOS app developers from distributing their apps through alternative channels.
In short, this claim fails for two significant reasons: (1) Epic Games fails to prove the first element, that Apple has monopoly power in the relevant product and geographic market; and (2) Epic Games alternatively fails to satisfy the rule of reason analysis under Section 1—an acknowledged less exacting test as compared to Section 2

As demonstrated with respect to the relevant market, Apple does not have substantial market power equating to monopoly power. While considerable, Epic Games has failed to show that Apple’s market power is durable and sustaining given the current state of the relevant market. For that reason, the Court finds that Epic Games failed to prove the first element of a Section 2 claim: the possession of monopoly power in the relevant market.

Accordingly, the Court finds that Apple’s app distribution restrictions do not violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act.

As established in the prior sections, see supra Facts §§ II.C., V.A.2.b., V.B.2.c., Apple is entitled to license its intellectual property for a fee, and to further guard against the uncompensated use of its intellectual property. The requirement of usage of IAP accomplishes this goal in the easiest and most direct manner, whereas Epic Games’ only proposed alternative would severely undermine it. Indeed, to the extent Epic Games suggests that Apple receive nothing from in-app purchases made on its platform,618 such a remedy is inconsistent with prevailing intellectual property law.

In sum, whether analyzed as an integrated functionality or from the perspective of consumer demand, IAP is not a separate product from iOS app distribution. Thus, Epic Games’ Count 6 fails to show the existence of an illegal tie under Section 1.

As with its Section 2 monopolization claim for the distribution of apps (Count 2), Epic Games’ Section 2 claim fails at the outset because Apple does not have monopoly power in the relevant product market.

 

[MhaelK]

But nothing about apple’s business stops a competitor to iOS from emerging. Apple doesn’t prevent developers from making apps for a multitude of different operating systems if another manufacturer decided to compete with apple in that regard. The remedy is not to penalise apple, it’s to increase competition in the smartphone operating system market so that no one platform has control and developers have a number of different platforms to develop for.

Nothing? How many platforms other than iOS/Android do you see today, and it is not because there hasnt been other who has tried to build Them. Profitable platform are depended on million of users, to attract the developers who will make the apps that Will then keep the current user base or attract more to the platform. Even if a much better platform than iOS was developed it would be almost impossible to make the switch for the user because of high switching cost - low number of app, friends on the platform, prossiblity of failure etc. Most likely, until another Big shift or innovation happens there Will only be iOS or Android. Just like Facebook Will remain king until a major shift happens, nomatter that everybody hate’s the Company.

In these cases then size of the network makes emerging competition almost impossible, and also impossible to ignore. Just Ignoring iOS is not an option for most business. That is why it is important to look at business practises of Apple, Google and Facebook With critical eyes. Even if we like the plarform.

 

[PC_tech]

and Epic cares about you how?

I never said they did?

 

[PC_tech]

Sorry what? Innocent until proven guilty right? Is that not how the law works?

Or is Apple guilty because a bunch of haters on the internet said it was so? Maybe these people should have been the ones taking apple to court, and not the lawyers Epic hired?



Let’s recap what was actually sa

Expect they will sell everything they know about you.

And again, Apple uses third party for the Apple card, what is your point exactly?

 

[PC_tech]

and Epic cares about you how?

oh, and this comment had nothing to do with Apple caring for you, not even related in the slightest bit 🙄

 

[PC_tech]

Apple is not a Monopoly.I also hope they win and continuing winning. Epic doesn't care about you or small developers now do they.

That they aren't is only your opinion, seems strange that governments around the world are starting to look more closely at them, ironic isn't it? 🙄

 

[I7guy]

Not really, the EPIC case still on the table, both didn’t win, but Apple got the first hit. Apple has been forced to make changes which they wouldn’t do without the South Korea antitrust and EPIC trial.
In addition to that, even in the U.S. there are additional antitrust investigations…

US antitrust bills on the way, one of which targets Apple- 9to5Mac

House Democrats are reportedly set to announce no fewer than five US antitrust bills, one of which would in part target Apple's App Store ...

9to5mac.com

Your living in some future where you hope something will happen, which may or may not. In the meantime an important legal victory (imo) has occurred for Apple.

Well, in the Ireland tax fight it was somehow okay that Apple won, simply because they used an existing „currently“ legal method to circumvent tax payments. These tax avoidance methods are known since many years, nations never did something against it, but doesn’t mean that’s morally right. Yeah i know many companies do this.

Anyway, this is also about to change, new laws and regulations will be launched soon here in the EU to stop these big corps shady tax avoidance methods. Tax should be paid where products are bought.

Anyway the point is, nobody can predict the future and the recent ruling in epic vs apple proves it. Of course, in the appeals process the tables can be turned.

 

[PC_tech]

Apple is under ongoing investigation for wrong business practices in other parts of the world.

This is what blows my mind, this is happening more and these people are trying to defend Apple as if it's a weakling just being bullied for no reason at all.

 

[Cosmosent]

IMO, Apple's Appeal is important for one very important reason, it's gotten a lot of people thinking & talking about the Current State of the iOS App Store.

That's a very good thing !

I believe Apple does in-deed have a Monopoly, & that it can be proven (by how they are able to Completely Control the Narrative).

Why is there NO way to Filter Off Game Apps, Little Kid Apps, OR Apple Arcade, in the Today tab of the App Store app ?

Because, that app is really just a Marketing Arm of Apple !

NOT viable, & certainly NOT credible !

 

[I7guy]

What does the court ruling have to do with the points I made?

To be clear this is what was posted:

Developers would also like the option of distributing their apps outside Apple's app store. That would solve the problem of developers getting a free ride from Apple. But wait, Apple doesn't allow them to do that either. Apple thinks they should get a cut of every app made even if Developers distribute it on their own and don't use any Apple corporate resources. Now who is the one asking for a free ride now?

Now you can reread my post.

 

[Cosmosent]

This is what blows my mind, this is happening more and these people are trying to defend Apple as if it's a weakling just being bullied for no reason at all.

The pendulum had swing too far in Apple's favor for too long.

And, now / soon, that will come back to bite them !

Tim Cook should have seen it coming years ago !

 

[I7guy]

This is what blows my mind, this is happening more and these people are trying to defend Apple as if it's a weakling just being bullied for no reason at all.

What's really mindblowing is the guilty until proven innocent mindset here. Judge Rogers hopefully clarified for many a lot of the nuances of this case.

IMO, Apple's Appeal is important for one very important reason, it's gotten a lot of people thinking & talking about the Current State of the iOS App Store.

That's a very good thing !

I believe Apple does in-deed have a Monopoly, & that it can be proven (by how they are able to Completely Control the Narrative).

Why is there NO way to Filter Off Game Apps, Little Kid Apps, OR Apple Arcade, in the Today tab of the App Store app ?

Because, that app is really just a Marketing Arm of Apple !

NOT viable, & certainly NOT credible !

I believe Apple does not have a monopoly on it's services. Now that we both put out our opinions let it waft in the universe, like the butterfly effect, and see where it goes.

 

[theotherphil]

What's really mindblowing is the guilty until proven innocent mindset here. Judge Rogers hopefully clarified for many a lot of the nuances of this case.

Even with the judgement and multiple videos explaining things by an actual lawyer, the haters continue to argue their points as if they carry more meaning than a Court Judgement.

There used to be a time when it was acceptable to be ignorant of facts due to lack of access to information. Nowadays, we don’t have that option….we have access to the world’s knowledge and still people tout their “beliefs” over facts. The problem is the twitter generation who get bored when having to consume more than a few lines of text at a time. Welcome to the new normal.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1zDCgJzZUy-TrSXpg6irNK7kbZt-NY0O

 

[I7guy]

Even with the judgement and multiple videos explaining things by an actual lawyer, the haters continue to argue their points as if they carry more meaning than a Court Judgement.

There used to be a time when it was acceptable to be ignorant of facts due to lack of access to information. Nowadays, we don’t have that option….we have access to the world’s knowledge and still people tout their “beliefs” over facts. The problem is the twitter generation who get bored when having to consume more than a few lines of text at a time. Welcome to the new normal.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1zDCgJzZUy-TrSXpg6irNK7kbZt-NY0O

Yes....I appreciate the links to those videos. The explanations were very well done and clear.

 

[BootsWalking]

Now you can reread my post.

I've reread your post. And reread mine. What does what I wrote have to do with the court ruling? I didn't make any mention of the ruling or what the court should or shouldn't compel Apple to do or what they're entitled to.

 

[Maximara]

Haha, Good luck enforcing that agreement. It’s null and void. I already bought the product, no agreement can stop me from using something I already own.

You missed the whole point. You do NOT own the OS which is built into the device. Apple does.

 

[FreedomPenguin]

Apple needs to hurry and rule the world already

 

[Glideslope]

Apple is in this for blood, or so it seems. Their legal eagles, I'm guessing, think they have an appeal with some merit. Of course, there seems to be a lot riding on this particular point.

Correct. They have merit taken from Epic’s hastily, poorly, compiled appeal.

Apple Legal sat back, absorbed the ruling, and compiled a well thought out Appeal with substantial merit.

Sweeney has voluntarily become the Poster “Child” for how your life changes when you rush forward with a flawed stragety.

Apple will be granted its request.

 

[Maximara]

Stop saying the judge decided they weren't a monopoly, that's a blatant lie, she said she was making no such decision and that only Epic failed to prove it 🙄🙄🙄

The judge DID decide Apple wasn't a monopoly by specifying what the market in question was:
"Having found the relevant product market to be that of mobile gaming transactions, the Court finds the area of effective competition in the geographic market to be global, with the exception of China." - Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 812 Filed 09/10/21

Apple's global market is a paltry 15.97% and only a 'Trump won the 2020 US election' believer could call that a "monopoly": "The threshold of market share for finding a prima facie case of monopoly power isgenerally no less than 65% market share." Last time I checked 17% is less then 65%.

The Judge repeatedly pointed out the burden of proof was on Epic and Epic one only only one point that that was due to California not Federal law. That wasn't enough and like Don Quixote Epic keeps tilting at this windmill. Apple only went into this after Epic filed its appeal.

 

[SegNerd]

This is what I believe what happened during 2008 App Store debut. Developers really should just charge iOS users 30% more than on android. They pay more on the phone, so does everything else. Apple’s “you can’t offer different prices” ruling is the one that needs to be abolished.

Good news, they did that four years ago.

I think Fortnite was already charging higher prices for IAP (versus outside purchases) before it was banned.

 

[Maximara]

But let's say it was a developer outside EU. How would Konsumentverket or other Swedish authority force an American developer to pay $5 back to a Swedish consumer against the developers will?

Though something called VAT which is built into the price?

 

[Premium1]

Why? The apps will not be less expensive in a another App Store, well they will probably be pirated so I guess they will be free.

Eh Netflix and others would like to have a word. Also just because they have another payment system doesn’t mean they will be able to be pirated/side loaded in anymore capacity than can already be done.