And why your analogy doesn’t work is because before the user bought that Ford, they were made fully aware of how the system works and even signed an agreement to the effect before they even used their car and had the option to return it at that point.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Removes Fortnite From App Store [Update: Epic Files Lawsuit Against Apple]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And why your analogy doesn’t work is because before the user bought that Ford, they were made fully aware of how the system works and even signed an agreement to the effect before they even used their car and had the option to return it at that point.
Okay, correct. Maybe the court of law will decide that a 30% cut of app sales is too much for a juggernaut like Apple, but there's nothing wrong or anti-competitive for Apple to collect a fee for distributing apps on their platform.
And Apple sells a display for $5,000. Apple and Epic are both corporations; their goal is to charge what the market will bear and not a cent more or less. No one's disputing that much. Issues of anticompetitive practices arise when Apple's trying to be both referee and player.
Super proud of Epic and Fortnite for taking a stand against Apple. Apple’s policies have catered to the big devs and left the small ones out in the dark for far too long. #freefortnite
And that $5,000 display is worth it, for the price. Its a tangible item.
A costume is not. It's certainly not worth $9
Off topic, but Apple didn't sue them:
Apple isn't trying to prevent Super Healthy Kids from using that logo. It's opposing their applied for federal registration of trademark.
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-company-with-pear-logo.2249220/post-28768175
I don't view any display as worth $5,000 for my needs. I also don't view digital costumes or dance moves as worth $9. That's why I don't buy either one; that doesn't mean they shouldn't exist for those who want them.
This is how Epic will fight this lawsuit. I feel Epic will go so hard down this route that they will accept to lose the battle to win the overall war of having the regulation around the different app stores changed.
This will come back to bite Epic in it's own app store ass but I don't think Epic care as they make way more money from the other app stores.
No, they should just play fair. They offer their own payment method companies can use inside apps that charges a 30% fee. That's fine, but the problem is they also ban mentioning that there are other ways to pay. That's the point where it becomes anticompetitive, since Apple doesn't lose that 30% when selling their own services.
Which "above". There's 17 pages 😂
Apple doesn't have any games like Fortnite that I'm aware of, so I don't see where Fortnite and Apple are competitors. (That Apple paperboy game from a few years ago was fun for a few minutes, though. Not sure how much IAP that one is making 😂 )
I think Tim Cook did the right thing by sending message to big players in “gaming industry”. I am waiting to see response from Microsoft and other “big investors who own the FortNite” and other games.
Like I said in the other thread - if it’s a fight they want, it’s a fight they will get. Just better be prepared to go all the way, because Apple expects and shows no quarters.
(Well, maybe not exactly, but I have always wanted to say that).
Like I said in the other thread - if it’s a fight they want, it’s a fight they will get. Just better be prepared to go all the way, because Apple expects and shows no quarters.
(Well, maybe not exactly, but I have always wanted to say that).
Why should you get to decide how much commission is appropriate?
95% would be “massive”. 50% would be a great deal for developers. 30% is more than reasonable.
I did. Did you?
If you don't agree with something/someone, maybe you shouldn't take their side nor represent said company. My opinion.
Wrong, I can buy a PS game on disc, play it and then sell it for £4 less than I bought it for. So it costs me £4 but the digital version I can’t sell costs £50.
No, that's social media adding a clickbait headline.
It's technically not wrong, but they intentionally omit so many crucial facts from the title
Nope that’s not now it works buddy we antitrust busted the auto industry decades ago to stop what we are talking about now specifically before autos had to buy from manufacture we found it in antitrust years ago there are no such agreements now know ur history
It's not anti-competitive behavior.
If you want to sell something in someone else's storefront, and they ask for a consignment fee for the privilege of using their established business; and you go in and work out a side deal with someone you met in that business to bypass the consignment fee, then you would be "stealing" money from that business: you just used their business for your own profit without paying for the service.