Apple Ready to 'Welcome Fortnite Back Onto iOS' if Epic Removes Direct Purchase After Losing Restraining Order Ruling

[laptech]

Personally I agree with what Epic is doing because Apple is using it's monopolistic stance to get it's own way because they know there is no app store competitor out there because Apple does not allow it. It's either a case for app developers to abide by Apples T&C's or don't bother at all. Telling app developers to move to android is a mute point because they want to develop app's for iphones but can only do so if they agree to the arbitary conditions imposed on them by Apple.

In the physical world, a designer/developer/supplier has the ability to approach numerous retail outlets to have their product sold in. They are able to work out individual arrangements with each retail outlet that best suits both the retail outlet and the designer/developer/supplier. If a retail outlet is not happy and decides to stop selling the product, whilst it will be of some inconvience to the designer/developer/supplier, they know there are other retail outlets out there they can work a deal with. This is what a competitive market is, it gives not only the designer/developer/supplier the choice of who they want to sell their product to, it also gives the customer a choice as to who to purchase that product from.

So, take Epic games, if they want to sell xbox or ps4 games, they can go to many retail outlets to see who wants to stock and sell their games. Choice for them and choice for the consumer as to which retail outlet they buy the game from. This is not the case in the digital world when it comes to the app store. There is only one app store, If Epic wants to develop a game for ios so iphone users can play the game, they have no choice but to use the app store. Not having a choice means they are solely at the hands of Apple and whatever terms and conditions Apple set. This is not competitive but very anti competitive.

 

[mattopotamus]

How many of those billion iPhones do you estimate apple could sell without third party apps, you know, the ones developers like Epic make? Apple makes arguably the best phones and computers, but they depend on developers to sell them, not the other way around, developers still have android and windows. Not a tiny market.

As a sensible poster said on the first page, two rich and powerful companies fighting for profit.

Just for the hell of it. How many millions of OG iPhones did they sell that didn't even have an App Store

 

[I7guy]

Personally I agree with what Epic is doing because Apple is using it's monopolistic stance to get it's own way because they know there is no app store competitor out there because Apple does not allow it. It's either a case for app developers to abide by Apples T&C's or don't bother at all. Telling app developers to move to android is a mute point because they want to develop app's for iphones but can only do so if they agree to the arbitary conditions imposed on them by Apple.

And for now those arbitrary conditions are legally binding.

In the physical world, a designer/developer/supplier has the ability to approach numerous retail outlets to have their product sold in. They are able to work out individual arrangements with each retail outlet that best suits both the retail outlet and the designer/developer/supplier. If a retail outlet is not happy and decides to stop selling the product, whilst it will be of some inconvience to the designer/developer/supplier, they know there are other retail outlets out there they can work a deal with. This is what a competitive market is, it gives not only the designer/developer/supplier the choice of who they want to sell their product to, it also gives the customer a choice as to who to purchase that product from.

The digital market isn't as big, but that Epic is also suing android shows there isn't a monopoly. The dev could could go to google, or alternatively, build out their own infrastructre, and develop their own phone. Or alternatively give apple 30%.

So, take Epic games, if they want to sell xbox or ps4 games, they can go to many retail outlets to see who wants to stock and sell their games. Choice for them and choice for the consumer as to which retail outlet they buy the game from. This is not the case in the digital world when it comes to the app store. There is only one app store, If Epic wants to develop a game for ios so iphone users can play the game, they have no choice but to use the app store. Not having a choice means they are solely at the hands of Apple and whatever terms and conditions Apple set. This is not competitive but very anti competitive.

The ruling allows this to stand regardless of your opinion.

 

[amartinez1660]

Let's not pretend this is anything other han two large companies trying to get as much profit as possible.

Exactly.
It bothers me to no end how there are defenders of Epic at this stage of the game. It is clear with all the info, other online stores fees, parallels to physical games stores, grocery stores, etc that this is a hand picked battle for publicity’s sake.

I would sue their ass for purposeful brand image defamation if that’s possible.

Now, I like epic, I like what they have done in the 3D world via games and graphics engines for decades. I grew up in part with them...
I do wish they did the full thing and put their mouth where their money is, if they got themselves banned from PSN, Switch, XBox, Ebgames/GameStop stores, etc etc etc besides the phone stores and declared war on the system, then you got a case.

They don’t even need to sue anybody, just, “from now on, only on epic store. Bye, thanks”
And then see who follows suit.

 

[Manzanito]

Just for the hell of it. How many millions of OG iPhones did they sell that didn't even have an App Store

According to this site, less than a million and a half.

Apple iPhone sales worldwide 2007-2023| Statista

The number of Apple iPhone unit sales dramatically increased between 2007 and 2023.

www.statista.com

Notice the increase in units sold with the introduction of the app store in 2008, almost ten times the units of the precedent year.

Now, if the reason is solely the app store, only one among other reasons or had no influence in the spectacular growth in sold units is up for debate. I’m inclined to think it’s a very important reason, but I wasn’t very interested in smartphones back in the day (iirc, I had a sony flip phone with some custom os and no internet connectivity), so I could be wrong.

 

[laptech]

And for now those arbitrary conditions are legally binding.


The digital market isn't as big, but that Epic is also suing android shows there isn't a monopoly. The dev could could go to google, or alternatively, build out their own infrastructre, and develop their own phone. Or alternatively give apple 30%.

The ruling allows this to stand regardless of your opinion.

Stop parroting the same excuse that every other Apple fan/supporter is using. The fact that android phones exist does not dismiss the claim of monopolistic behaviour. Android is a completely different system.

A very good example of a competitive market in the digital world is windows based file hosters. Back in the day two of the best and biggest was CNET's download resource and Tucows download resource. There was numerous others that hosted the same files but those two were the biggest and most commonly known. Such file resources would hold all sorts of software from commercial software, demo software, free software and device drivers. The main file could either be downloaded from one of these resource sites our could be downloaded from the software developers own site. The file resource sites would commonly have a link to the softwares official site. Many of the biggest software developers in the world would allow their commercialy owned software to be hosted on such sites. Some of the resource sites had good download speeds, some had bad download speeds and those looking for certain pieces of software would visit the sites and see which one was the best option for them.

I believe this is what Epic wants with the app store, for the store to be hosted in other places so both app developers and customers can pick and chose which hosting site to use.

 

[SarcasticJoe]

why did tim sweeney ever think this approach of stomp feet and whine was appropriate? he's supposed to be a ceo but let his company start a cartoon ad campaign to support a legal battle over apple's store policies....

i dont understand why he is leading his company like a child

In case you're not familiar with what he's been doing as of late unrelated to this, he's been going around acting like some kind of patron saint of gamers by launching a game store that's essentially a worse version of Steam and only tries to compete by paying developers lock their games to it. In other words; Using his checkbook full of Fortnite money to make competitors less competitive rather than trying to offer a better service in any meaningful way.

With that kind of grip, or rather lack thereof, on reality it's no surprise he's gone and to launched a Don Quixote lawsuit against Apple like this. The lawyers he's hired will obviously be able to bill Epic an ungodly amount of very expensive hours so they obviously don't care. Even if it goes so badly that Epic has to pay Apple's legal bill as well (which I really wouldn't be surprised if it happened).

 

[smallcoffee]

Would you try to get a better deal or just capitulate?

Not sure how I'd react in the situation myself. As a 3rd-party I fall on Apple's side here, especially as I see the benefits of having the single store.

 

[mattopotamus]

According to this site, less than a million and a half.

Apple iPhone sales worldwide 2007-2023| Statista

The number of Apple iPhone unit sales dramatically increased between 2007 and 2023.

www.statista.com

Notice the increase in units sold with the introduction of the app store in 2008, almost ten times the units of the precedent year.

Now, if the reason is solely the app store, only one among other reasons or had no influence in the spectacular growth in sold units is up for debate. I’m inclined to think it’s a very important reason, but I wasn’t very interested in smartphones back in the day (iirc, I had a sony flip phone with some custom os and no internet connectivity), so I could be wrong.

Like you said, there were tons of factors back then. In 2007 people were using flip phones, so it was a giant leap in technology. It was also priced that way for the first few months, and carrier subsidies were not a thing.

 

[Manzanito]

Like you said, there were tons of factors back then. In 2007 people were using flip phones, so it was a giant leap in technology. It was also priced that way for the first few months, and carrier subsidies were not a thing.

Things have changed a lot in 13 years, but it’s undeniable the amount of worth a healthy third party apps ecosystem adds to a device. Even if price, performance and availability were factors that explain the huge increase in popularity, the functionality added by the app store also played a part, I’d say.

Anyway, my point was, and I stand by it, that without the added value that developers bring to iOS, apple would sell a lot less devices, and it’s in apple best interest to go back to having happy developers, while charging a fair price for the infrastructure.

 

[falainber]

What about the consumers? They don't get a vote? But according to Epic, they already did vote in that they preferred the Google Play store over an alternative forcing Epic to return to the Google store. Epic's claim seems to make the case that there is some value to the App stores so maybe those running them are entitled to some compensation?

Sideloading is very different from the app store.

 

[Grohowiak]

In case you're not familiar with what he's been doing as of late unrelated to this, he's been going around acting like some kind of patron saint of gamers by launching a game store that's essentially a worse version of Steam and only tries to compete by paying developers lock their games to it. In other words; Using his checkbook full of Fortnite money to make competitors less competitive rather than trying to offer a better service in any meaningful way.

With that kind of grip, or rather lack thereof, on reality it's no surprise he's gone and to launched a Don Quixote lawsuit against Apple like this. The lawyers he's hired will obviously be able to bill Epic an ungodly amount of very expensive hours so they obviously don't care. Even if it goes so badly that Epic has to pay Apple's legal bill as well (which I really wouldn't be surprised if it happened).

I never knew Steam is giving away AAA quality games for free. How's that bad for gamers?
Also all those game devs get paid for that. Again. How's that bad?
Oh and devs only pay epic 12% so for the third time... again how is that bad?

 

[I7guy]

Stop parroting the same excuse that every other Apple fan/supporter is using. The fact that android phones exist does not dismiss the claim of monopolistic behaviour. Android is a completely different system.

Stop parroting the same excuse that every other critic is using. That fact that android phones exists DOES dismiss the claim of monopolistic behavior. Is your "fact" any more substantiated than mine? If so, cite some valid legal precedents the judge can use.

A very good example of a competitive market in the digital world is windows based file hosters. Back in the day two of the best and biggest was CNET's download resource and Tucows download resource. There was numerous others that hosted the same files but those two were the biggest and most commonly known. Such file resources would hold all sorts of software from commercial software, demo software, free software and device drivers. The main file could either be downloaded from one of these resource sites our could be downloaded from the software developers own site. The file resource sites would commonly have a link to the softwares official site. Many of the biggest software developers in the world would allow their commercialy owned software to be hosted on such sites. Some of the resource sites had good download speeds, some had bad download speeds and those looking for certain pieces of software would visit the sites and see which one was the best option for them.

I believe this is what Epic wants with the app store, for the store to be hosted in other places so both app developers and customers can pick and chose which hosting site to use.

What Epic wants is subject to some decisions and whether they get it or not, saying Apple is a monopoly on the app store or not is not on MR is not going to change that. 50% may be right, 50% may be wrong, or there may be another ruling. We don't know.

 

[wakeupworld]

Epic needs to go all the way to the Supreme Court; screw Apple

 

[I7guy]

Epic needs to go all the way to the Supreme Court; screw Apple

Apple needs to go all the way to the Supreme Court; screw Epic.

 

[TantalizedMind]

More like: Our very first priority is to ensure we keep getting our 30% cut of everything your customers buy, so make sure you enable that back.

Exactly. If they cared about their users they would allow Xbox X-Cloud streaming. I don’t hate Apple but I’m very upset with them.

 

[dafrosty1]

Now replace Apple with <mobile network provider name> and explain to me why they arent entiled to 30% of what Apple sells.

That isn’t really comparable because network carriers bill customers directly for use of their network. Apple doesn’t charge users based on how much they play Fortnite. They only charge a percentage for transaction made on their platform. Completely different business models. That being said, network carriers do put a retail mark-up on the iPhones they sell to you though. This retail mark-up is greater than 30%, so they are technically making the +30% when selling Apple products. Don’t try to twist this into something it isn’t.

 

[Lamboscott]

Three things...
1. No one is mentioning that epic can sell vbucks from epics own website and iOS users can buy vbucks at the “discount” price which epic conveniently is making an extra $1 while saying that they are passing through the “savings” to mobile users.
2. Epic only cares about making more money. Remember they are owned by the Chinese and don’t play by American rules.
3. Epic doesn’t give a damn about its customers on apple or they would change their app to be in compliance and litigate appropriately not cause the iOS customer base suffer.

 

[itickings]

Stop parroting the same excuse that every other Apple fan/supporter is using. The fact that android phones exist does not dismiss the claim of monopolistic behaviour. Android is a completely different system.

Well, that depends on how the relevant market is defined, does it not?

If the market is software distribution for smartphones/tablets, then Apple certainly does not have a large enough marketshare to be monopolistic. Possibly a large enough share to be anticompetitive enough to warrant restrictions, but nowhere near a monopoly.

If on the other hand the market is software distribution for iOS/iPadOS, then yeah. It will be interesting to hear what the courts have to say. The consequences of a novel interpretation like that will be huge!

 

[dafrosty1]

Indeed. To make it fair, we need to let the market do it. Just allow alternative app stores and we'll see if app developers prefer the stores with 30% IAP/subscription or some store(s) might be able to offer a better service.

So how would that be different from forcing Walmart to allow Target to place mini stores inside their store, or force McDonalds to install a Wendys counter? If a second app store was allowed on ios, Apple would still be entitled to a cut of their sales because it is really a store inside their building. By your logic, shops in a mall wouldn’t have to pay the mall who built the environment for the shop to thrive. They just get to set up shop because they compete?

 

[Grohowiak]

So how would that be different from forcing Walmart to allow Target to place mini stores inside their store, or force McDonalds to install a Wendys counter? If a second app store was allowed on ios, Apple would still be entitled to a cut of their sales because it is really a store inside their building. By your logic, shops in a mall wouldn’t have to pay the mall who built the environment for the shop to thrive. They just get to set up shop because they compete?

Dunno about big stores as for fastfood they are quite often in the same plaza or shopping area (food courts inside malls).

 

[Lord Hamsa]

Would you be ok with if someone is taking 30% + Taxes of what your earning?

In the physical publishing model, the producer of the work typically gets about 30% of the list price of the item, with the rest going to cover the costs of distribution channel (appx 30%) and retailer markup (app 40%) - this is how a retailer can still make money selling below list price.

In digital publishing, a 70/30 split between publisher and platform has long been the case, with the platform providing the distribution channel service and the publisher keeping their normal cut plus the retailer markup.

 

[dafrosty1]

Lol. Now that's some Apple-quality spin right there! Would government taking over your business (again, lol!) be anything like Apple telling you what kind of apps you can and can't develop today? Extorting a 30% commission? Forcing successful apps to subsidize unsuccessful ones? Playing favorites by pulling rules out of their you-know-what to justify charging Epic a 30% commission on V-Buck sales while Amazon and Uber and others pay nothing?

You may want to check your definition of extortion, because a commission is an agreed upon rate for a service. No one signs a contract to be extorted. Also, Uber and Amazon sell physical goods and services that aren’t delivered through your phone. Evrything Epic does is digital and relies on the phone and store model to deliver said digital goods. Poor comparison.

 

[Manzanito]

Dunno about big stores as for fastfood they are quite often in the same plaza or shopping area (food courts inside malls).

But it’s not the same thing. The poster you quoted didn’t say next to, but inside of. You can’t force macdonalds to serve you a taco bell burrito. Unless you are Chuck Norris.

 

[Grohowiak]

But it’s not the same thing. The poster you quoted didn’t say next to, but inside of. You can’t force macdonalds to serve you a taco bell burrito. Unless you are Chuck Norris.

No but you go to McDonalds to eat McDonalds. You're free to eat ANYWHERE else you want.
It's a choice not THE ONLY option you have.
You don't need to force McD to have TacoBell because TB is usually few feet away (well at least where I am from)