Sidebar Sidebar
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]

XXPP said:
When will game developers sue SONY Playstation and MS XBOX for having to pay to sell games on these platforms?
If game developers manage to destroy the appstore, the last secure platform will be destroyed.
Click to expand...

So the rate that Sony and Microsoft charge are actually much less than the purported 30%. Both companies use progressive pricing (the rate increases the more units you sell). Only the highest grossing labels get to the 30% bracket. Most developers only see a 5-10% or maybe 15% cut.

If Apple were to lower their rate to this price, it would still be high compared to the US average for supply chains (roughly 3%) -- but it would at least be more competitive than what it is now.
 
Safari web apps are artificially crippled (lacking access to most device APIs, inability to keep persistent cookies/data >1 week) to favor the App Store where Apple can take a cut.
Click to expand...

Common misconception, but not true. There are tons of discussion about this in context of PWA, as this was the first reaction by many developers. Retention policy is built to prevent cross site tracking, not to cripple web apps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ian87w
jetrois said:
And that’s the reason I don’t shop at Walmart... not a reason to sue but if Walmart stopped me from shopping elsewhere would be a problem that’s the problem here Apple will have to let other stores open goggle got hit similarly a few years ago
Click to expand...
His analogy doesn't work, there are thousands of stores. Walmart also has several payment methods; cash, Card or scan a code. The issue with the App Store it's the only place to sell your IOS App, also Apple doesn't abide by the same rules they not including the backroom deals they made with some companies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Unregistered 4U said:
To be fair, what developers REALLY want is access to user data. Data they can’t get to because of Apple’s requirements. However, 30% is a nice number to rally folks around. Until, of course, you realize pretty much every store has similar or higher rates.

It’s not even defending Apple, it’s defending the idea that you should do your homework and ONLY sign contracts/enter into agreements that you are willing to accept. If you don’t like some of the terms and you can’t negotiate anything better, well, then you’ve got a decision to make.

Amazon didn’t do anything without obtaining agreement from Apple first. Epic can claim whatever they want, but right up front, Apple can claim Epic is not adhering to the rules. Kicking them off the App Store is what I expected, just like other non-compliant apps.

I think this is just like all the other “loud” apps recently. They know they’ll back down quickly and eventually because they know Apple’s terms with them is binding. They just want to make a little noise that they’re hoping eventually gets Apple to change their tune.
Click to expand...
From the legal perspective, this is extremely cut and dry. You can’t treat different developers differently. The same rules must apply to everyone. Otherwise, this is unfair practices, for which Apple will have to pay dearly.

As for whether or not Epic tried to negotiate with Apple before they enabled the subscription payments outside the app, you don’t know what preceded this escalation. The fact that Epic was ready to file the suit immediately upon their app having been removed from the App Store, and the fact that they had the ad prepared to run tells me that there was an attempt to settle this privately. Epic knew exactly what would transpire if they went ahead with their plan. Apple must have threatened them with the removal of their app some time ago.

Unfair trade practices are not looked at favorably by American courts. Epic has a very strong case here. Greed eventually comes back to bite you, and Apple has become too greedy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silentdevotion and PC_tech
sirozha said:
From the legal perspective, this is extremely cut and dry. You can’t treat different developers differently. The same rules must apply to everyone. Otherwise, this is unfair practices, for which Apple will have to pay dearly.

As for whether or not Epic tried to negotiate with Apple before they enabled the subscription payments outside the app, you don’t know what preceded this escalation. The fact that Epic was ready to file the suit immediately upon their app having been removed from the App Store, and the fact that they had the ad prepared to run tells me that there was an attempt to settle this privately. Epic knew exactly what would transpire if they went ahead with their plan. Apple must have threatened them with the removal of their app some time ago.

Unfair trade practices are not looked at favorably by American courts. Epic has a very strong case here. Greed eventually comes back to bite you, and Apple has become too greedy.
Click to expand...

The lawsuit was most likely conceived when Apple rejected the Epic Game Store, the heart of the anti-trust allegations. However, Epic could not file the complaint until they became an injured party. Hence today's posturing. Apple's removal of Fortnite gave Epic the standing they needed as an aggrieved party to sue. Of course, Apple had no other way -- they made very clear and public what their policies were. This is corporate chess at its finest.
 
GermanSuplex said:
One thing about Apple's rules is that they are applied evenly and fairly from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

They carved out exemptions for others. I have many apps where I pay for the service/content outside of the Apple store.

To name a few (looking at my iPhone now): Duo, 1Password, Netflix, NYT, Prime Video, Youtube, Bria, Logi Circle, Shadow...

Shadow is a particularly interesting one as I can run Steam games and Epic games on my iPad (with keyboard and mouse)

Also makes me wonder what happens with cross-platform multiplayer games? Are they banned on IOS? (obviously I don't play any)

Edit: Interesting discussion here: https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/27251
 
Last edited:
Scipster said:
The lawsuit was most likely conceived when Apple rejected the Epic Game Store, the heart of the anti-trust allegations. However, Epic could not file the complaint until they became an injured party. Hence today's posturing. Apple's removal of Fortnite gave Epic the standing they needed as an aggrieved party to sue. Of course, Apple had no other way -- they made very clear and public what their policies were. This is corporate chess at its finest.
Click to expand...

Imagine injury from Walmart because they banned you for stealing.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: the8thark
gregohb said:
Apple needs to make its case clearer and louder. If Epic were to win, then all apps would be free, with in-app purchases and Apple gets nothing
Click to expand...
And that’s how it should be. Apple should only charge for the services that they provide and not take a flat 30% cut from developers’ revenue. Developers have a lot of expenses to cover from their revenues, and the 30% fee is worse than the Mafia’s protection fee. At least the Mob understands that exorbitant protection fees lead to trouble, as business owners turn to the cops when the protection fees become excessive. Guess what? Epic has decided to go to the cops. Good for them.
 
We all know Apple hasn't been a group of angels in some cases, but this is just dumb and dirty by Epic and clear n dry in the eyes of the law.

If you want to use a company's services and you don't abide by the rules, don't be surprised when you get epically booted.

This is classic liberalism at its finest.... "we didn't get what we wanted even though we agreed to abide by your terms and since you booted us for breaking those terms, we're going to throw a hissy fit and sue you because we don't like it"

wtf is with wrong with people...
 
wtf is wrong with you that you don’t understand the concept of fair trade policies?

Apple let Amazon have their apps on the App Store and sell subscription through the Amazon web site exclusively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
sigsegv said:
When I buy a PC I don't have to pay 30% to Microsoft or Intel (or Dell, etc) for every software purchase and in-app transaction I do on that machine.

Ditto for Steam; I don't have to use it.

Apple locks their platform down and there's no escape for consumers and sellers. This "feature" coming to a Mac soon no doubt...
Click to expand...

Uhhhh you do know Steam takes some percentage of every sale from the developer. JUST like Apple does.
 
xWhiplash said:
Uhhhh you do know Steam takes some percentage of every sale from the developer. JUST like Apple does.
Click to expand...
But again, there are multiple app stores on Windows. Not so on iOS and iPadOS. This is all about Epic's own app store and how Apple rejected it.

The same goes for PlayStation and XBOX -- you can still buy physical discs, meaning there are multiple sellers/app stores in those systems.

It would be cool if Apple allowed you to buy software and in-app keys directly from the vendor that you can redeem through the App Store. That would bring Apple back into compliance with the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Keebler said:
We all know Apple hasn't been a group of angels in some cases, but this is just dumb and dirty by Epic and clear n dry in the eyes of the law.

If you want to use a company's services and you don't abide by the rules, don't be surprised when you get epically booted.

This is classic liberalism at its finest.... "we didn't get what we wanted even though we agreed to abide by your terms and since you booted us for breaking those terms, we're going to throw a hissy fit and sue you because we don't like it"

wtf is with wrong with people...
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with these people. It's a well crafted strategy, probably already planned way ahead complete with produced ads. It's pure capitalism opportunist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
sigsegv said:
Doesn't matter. You can't contract yourself out of antitrust law; in fact that's precisely what the law is there for - to stop these abusive practices.
Click to expand...
So breaking a app agreement and your app getting removed is an abusive practice? Go ahead, try singing up for very common website builders/services and try to create adult content there. Your website will get taken down because it breaches your agreement. Do you also consider that an abusive practice?
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: egrimo, 1144557 and freedomlinux
StellarVixen said:
And this is why we object to restricting Mac apps to App Store only. We are lucky that Mac OS was created a long ago, when freedom meant more than nowadays, otherwise, we would have iOS-like Mac OS. We need to preserve that.
Click to expand...
Sadly the Mac is well into its transition to becoming like the walled garden of iOS. It's too late, that freedom has already suffered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peperino and rwxx
Scipster said:
But again, there are multiple app stores on Windows. Not so on iOS and iPadOS. This is all about Epic's own app store and how Apple rejected it.

The same goes for PlayStation and XBOX -- you can still buy physical discs, meaning there are multiple sellers/app stores in those systems.

It would be cool if Apple allowed you to buy software and in-app keys directly from the vendor that you can redeem through the App Store. That would bring Apple back into compliance with the law.
Click to expand...

And they all take a percentage of every sale. Epic Store, Windows Store, Origin. They all take a percentage of EVERY sale, just like Apple.

And Sony/Microsoft gets a percentage of every sale even if its physical due to getting licensing costs.
 
xWhiplash said:
So breaking a app agreement and your app getting removed is an abusive practice? Go ahead, try singing up for very common website builders/services and try to create adult content there. Your website will get taken down because it breaches your agreement. Do you also consider that an abusive practice?
Click to expand...

It depends on what the law considers abusive.

The Supreme Court has made it very clear that the First Amendment does not protect obscene content, which is why it can written off as abusive.

On the other hand, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act makes clear that monopolies - i.e. only one app store -- is abusive, hence the lawsuit.
[automerge]1597362261[/automerge]
xWhiplash said:
And they all take a percentage of every sale. Epic Store, Windows Store, Origin. They all take a percentage of EVERY sale, just like Apple.

And Sony/Microsoft gets a percentage of every sale even if its physical due to getting licensing costs.
Click to expand...
But at a much lower rate. If Apple were to cut their rates down to 5-10%, they'd likely be fine. I flesh this out in an earlier post.
 
Abazigal said:
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).
Click to expand...

Yeah. You know what the funny thing about all of this? Complaining about 30% yet spending millions for one lawsuit.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Unregistered 4U
No big loss to Epic since it can still be played on other platforms. Apple has never been a relevant gaming platform anyway.
 
Scipster said:
It depends on what the law considers abusive.

The Supreme Court has made it very clear that the First Amendment does not protect obscene content, which is why it can written off as abusive.

On the other hand, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act makes clear that monopolies - i.e. only one app store -- is abusive, hence the lawsuit.
[automerge]1597362261[/automerge]

But at a much lower rate. If Apple were to cut their rates down to 5-10%, they'd likely be fine. I flesh this out in an earlier post.
Click to expand...

So? If Apple charges too much, capitalism will play out when people switch to Android. People think Apple charges way too much for Macs, and they do. This is why Windows PCs are still the primary environment.

What gives you the right (myself included so don't think I am picking on you) to say that just because company X has a product priced at $30, company Y's product that is $50 needs to become $30?

Go to the store. There are many MANY similar products that are priced differently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back