Apple Retains Gibson Dunn Lawyers From Samsung Case to Combat Epic Games

[DanTheMan827]

What people don't realize is that this could very well make the antitrust regulators force Apple into allowing apps to be distributed outside of the app store, that would allow developers who choose to not be on the app store the avenue to sell their software how they see fit while footing the bills themselves.

Apps like Kodi could be distributed directly to the users instead of requiring workarounds along with other apps Apple chooses to not allow on the App Store but are otherwise completely legal.

Most people would choose to stay in the App Store rather than deal with sideloading if not simply because of the user experience, but for the power users who want more than what Apple offers they can choose to install software from outside of Apple's store just like they can on Mac.

 

[cmaier]

What people don't realize is that this could very well make the antitrust regulators force Apple into allowing apps to be distributed outside of the app store, that would allow developers who choose to not be on the app store the avenue to sell their software how they see fit while footing the bills themselves.

Apps like Kodi could be distributed directly to the users instead of requiring workarounds along with other apps Apple chooses to not allow on the App Store but are otherwise completely legal.

Most people would choose to stay in the App Store rather than deal with sideloading if not simply because of the user experience, but for the power users who want more than what Apple offers they can choose to install software from outside of Apple's store just like they can on Mac.

“What people don’t realize?”

Of course everyone realizes that.

Doesn’t mean it WILL happen, though.

 

[dguisinger]

You are making an argument that hosting, and all the tools needed that Apple provides is not expensive. When it, in fact, is way more expensive to do that on your own.

Hosting is not that expensive in the grand scheme of things. If it is more expensive than the product you are selling, you are doing it wrong.

Having a platform requires having tools. Having tools is a cost of doing business. I'm not arguing that they have to be free (though completing platforms have free tools), I'm arguing that telling a sub-group of developers they are paying for everyone's tools for no particular good reason is a bad argument. Either its a cost of doing business (writeoff), paid for (partially) by dev fees ($100 x 1+ million devs per year?), or charge every developer for it.

 

[DanTheMan827]

“What people don’t realize?”

Of course everyone realizes that.

Doesn’t mean it WILL happen, though.

From what I've read, so many people think that Epic just wants a free ride on the App Store... that they want to be on the App Store and be able to process their own payments.

I believe their end goal is to be able to distribute outside of the App Store on their own while footing all the costs of distribution... that's hardly a "free ride" like people are thinking

 

[dguisinger]

From what I've read, so many people think that Epic just wants a free ride on the App Store... that they want to be on the App Store and be able to process their own payments.

I believe their end goal is to be able to distribute outside of the App Store on their own while footing all the costs of distribution... that's hardly a "free ride" like people are thinking

Well, their end goal partially is what you just stated, as stated directly in their lawsuit

 

[mrcloaked]

Simple software is fine.

 

[dguisinger]

Not expensive? Are you SERIOUS? My CacheFLY bill alone is $500 a month. I barely make up for that cost. I also have my Squarespace bill, Visual Studio bill, marketing bills and much more.

May I ask out of curiosity, why CacheFly as a CDN? Looking at a comparison, there are very few features that seem unique to them, and $500 is their minimum vs others that have none. I'm just curious what they are providing that other CDNs don't that you require.

 

[NotTooLate]

What people don't realize is that this could very well make the antitrust regulators force Apple into allowing apps to be distributed outside of the app store, that would allow developers who choose to not be on the app store the avenue to sell their software how they see fit while footing the bills themselves.

Apps like Kodi could be distributed directly to the users instead of requiring workarounds along with other apps Apple chooses to not allow on the App Store but are otherwise completely legal.

Most people would choose to stay in the App Store rather than deal with sideloading if not simply because of the user experience, but for the power users who want more than what Apple offers they can choose to install software from outside of Apple's store just like they can on Mac.

I dont agree , Facebook (as an example ,but pick any big 3rd party app) , will yank their App from the main store and you will be FORCED to sideloading it , then they will just do as they please with tracking and selling your information , being part of the app store aside from all the money related stuff also makes you play by the rules that apple set in regards to tracking , forcing you to code "sign up with Apple" into your app and other privacy related guidelines that are being enforced , this is not about "power users" , its about ALL the users and how developers will take advantage of them once they have no shackles on.

Also note that Mobile tracking is much more of a thing then Mac , as most folks use their iPhone way more then a computer , and moreover for anything social/private life related (which is what the ad companies are looking for).

 

[Ethosik]

Hosting is not that expensive in the grand scheme of things. If it is more expensive than the product you are selling, you are doing it wrong.

Having a platform requires having tools. Having tools is a cost of doing business. I'm not arguing that they have to be free (though completing platforms have free tools), I'm arguing that telling a sub-group of developers they are paying for everyone's tools for no particular good reason is a bad argument. Either its a cost of doing business (writeoff), paid for (partially) by dev fees ($100 x 1+ million devs per year?), or charge every developer for it.

Ok let's walk through some things.

You have a team of 6, and are a startup. Let's use Visual Studio for this example. Since you have 6 people, you cannot use Community edition so you need to buy six licenses of Visual Studio Professional at least. For a standalone license cost, that is $3,000 for VS 2019.

Great, you built your app. Now you need a website to make it discoverable. Lets use Squarespace. That comes out to be let's go with $216 a year for the business price.

Now you need to have people be able to buy your product. That is 3% of each transaction.

You have some clients in France, UK, Saudi Arabia that are interested in your product and need a fast download. Your program is quite large so you need to go with the CacheFLY CDN Global which is $2,000 a month which allows 100 TB of transfer. You go with CacheFLY for that 100% uptime and the features just have everything you need.

You have several clients, but you want to increase the discoverability. So you hire a marketing team that posts to Facebook, puts up Google Ads, focuses on brand recognition, gets reviews from your existing clients and puts them on the Squarespace site and so on.

ALL of this adds up. Apple does most of this for just the 30% cut. Larger companies will need bigger staff, which is more cost, better website traffic that can handle millions of hits (typically multiple web servers that are load balanced), the more expensive CacheFLY account if you have millions of downloads on your 100GB game. More developers so more Visual Studio licenses and personnel costs.

My point is, it is not cheap like you are making it sound. Doing all of this yourself adds up.
[automerge]1597853903[/automerge]

May I ask out of curiosity, why CacheFly as a CDN? Looking at a comparison, there are very few features that seem unique to them, and $500 is their minimum vs others that have none. I'm just curious what they are providing that other CDNs don't that you require.

Actually I was grandfathered in with their Pay as you Go tier so some months are cheaper, some months are more expensive.

 

[dguisinger]

I dont agree , Facebook (as an example ,but pick any big 3rd party app) , will yank their App from the main store and you will be FORCED to sideloading it , then they will just do as they please with tracking and selling your information , being part of the app store aside from all the money related stuff also makes you play by the rules that apple set in regards to tracking , forcing you to code "sign up with Apple" into your app and other privacy related guidelines that are being enforced , this is not about "power users" , its about ALL the users and how developers will take advantage of them once they have no shackles on.

Actually, it does very little good for most companies to not offer app store distribution, most that want an option to distribute separately would probably do both.

If it wasn't for the 30% IAP I doubt Epic would object to paying a reasonable distribution cost on their free apps and using their store. Sure, they'd like to offer their own store, but I doubt Fortnite for example would be exclusive to their own store.

 

[typecase]

There are some things only outside counsel are allowed to do! (For example, when two companies sue each other, often times inside counsel is not allowed to see documents from the other company, even if those documents are of critical importance in the lawsuit).

Thanks. This is helpful. Wondered why this is.

 

[NotTooLate]

Actually, it does very little good for most companies to not offer app store distribution, most that want an option to distribute separately would probably do both.

If it wasn't for the 30% IAP I doubt Epic would object to paying a reasonable distribution cost on their free apps and using their store. Sure, they'd like to offer their own store, but I doubt Fortnite for example would be exclusive to their own store.

" but I doubt Fortnite for example would be exclusive to their own store." , oh so can I download it on steam ? or any other way without their launcher ?

Its only about getting a store , nothing less would make sense in this war , their revenue from iOS sells is small , if they care about the 30% they would go after the Consoles where they make much more money , but they know they wont get a store at the playstation , so no need to go that route.

 

[dguisinger]

Ok let's walk through some things.

You have a team of 6, and are a startup. Let's use Visual Studio for this example. Since you have 6 people, you cannot use Community edition so you need to buy six licenses of Visual Studio Professional at least. For a standalone license cost, that is $3,000 for VS 2019.

Great, you built your app. Now you need a website to make it discoverable. Lets use Squarespace. That comes out to be let's go with $216 a year for the business price.

Now you need to have people be able to buy your product. That is 3% of each transaction.

You have some clients in France, UK, Saudi Arabia that are interested in your product and need a fast download. Your program is quite large so you need to go with the CacheFLY CDN Global which is $2,000 a month which allows 100 TB of transfer. You go with CacheFLY for that 100% uptime and the features just have everything you need.

You have several clients, but you want to increase the discoverability. So you hire a marketing team that posts to Facebook, puts up Google Ads, focuses on brand recognition, gets reviews from your existing clients and puts them on the Squarespace site and so on.

ALL of this adds up. Apple does most of this for just the 30% cut. Larger companies will need bigger staff, which is more cost, better website traffic that can handle millions of hits (typically multiple web servers that are load balanced), the more expensive CacheFLY account if you have millions of downloads on your 100GB game. More developers so more Visual Studio licenses and personnel costs.

My point is, it is not cheap like you are making it sound. Doing all of this yourself adds up.
[automerge]1597853903[/automerge]


Actually I was grandfathered in with their Pay as you Go tier so some months are cheaper, some months are more expensive.

To be fair, most apps on the App Store don't sell 100TB worth a month. Again, studio costs differently depending on what you need access to and how many people. Many people these days can get by using VS Code. It all depends on what you are building, and how. Different teams will have different costs. I won't argue that you don't need to pay it. I've bought and paid for Visual Studio many times over the years. Which is why I don't buy the arguement that Apple can't charge for their tools in a normal way where everyone shares the burden... or why it isn't absorbed in the industry's leading margins on selling the platform itself.

You can also fine-tune CDNs, which I'm sure you are aware. If you have something that only matters in a north american market, you can limit the number of places its cached to save money. Many large service-based apps have particular markets, and therefore could run a CDN cheaper than you.

YMMV right? I don't think because you find it more expensive means others would agree, or that they shouldn't have the choice.

-edit-

Oh yeah, service based apps probably already have a CDN for edge-level service APIs or content the apps dish up. So you aren't necessarily eliminating a cost by using the AppStore

 

[cmaier]

Thanks. This is helpful. Wondered why this is.

There‘s also the sage wisdom that a person acting as his own attorney has a fool for a client...

 

[Ethosik]

To be fair, most apps on the App Store don't sell 100TB worth a month. Again, studio costs differently depending on what you need access to and how many people. Many people these days can get by using VS Code. It all depends on what you are building, and how. Different teams will have different costs. I won't argue that you don't need to pay it. I've bought and paid for Visual Studio many times over the years. Which is why I don't buy the arguement that Apple can't charge for their tools in a normal way where everyone shares the burden... or why it isn't absorbed in the industry's leading margins on selling the platform itself.

You can also fine-tune CDNs, which I'm sure you are aware. If you have something that only matters in a north american market, you can limit the number of places its cached to save money. Many large service-based apps have particular markets, and therefore could run a CDN cheaper than you.

YMMV right? I don't think because you find it more expensive means others would agree, or that they shouldn't have the choice.

-edit-

Oh yeah, service based apps probably already have a CDN for edge-level service APIs or content the apps dish up. So you aren't necessarily eliminating a cost by using the AppStore

And if you can make all this work without 30% by doing all of this stuff yourself, you can always just develop for Android and have it be a side loaded app.

My point was it actually is expensive doing all of this yourself where you were making it out to be inexpensive. If you sell your software for $500 to make up for all of this to be like a 10% for ALL of this stuff, then sure. But there is Android for that. You are in fact hosting it yourself, providing the download yourself.

This is actually why I know a few companies only develop for Android. They get more users, and they control all of this themselves.

 

[MacBH928]

meanwhile at Gibson Dunn

I really wonder how much they make from these multi-billion Apple lawsuits

 

[davidjytang]

All these people thinking Epic is the underdog don’t quite realize this whole thing is being backed by the CCP. This is a payback for what the USA did to Huawei.

CCP has no quarrel with Apple. Apple has been extremely docile and provides plenty jobs in China.

 

[dguisinger]

And if you can make all this work without 30% by doing all of this stuff yourself, you can always just develop for Android and have it be a side loaded app.

My point was it actually is expensive doing all of this yourself where you were making it out to be inexpensive. If you sell your software for $500 to make up for all of this to be like a 10% for ALL of this stuff, then sure. But there is Android for that. You are in fact hosting it yourself, providing the download yourself.

This is actually why I know a few companies only develop for Android. They get more users, and they control all of this themselves.

But again, in the grand scheme, we are overall talking IAP. If Apple is so concerned about this upfront expenses, charge for them. Bill developers for storage and bandwidth used with an acceptable margin, even if they are a free app. Nothing is going through Apple's delivery network for IAP purchases or app subscriptions. They should charge for that when it does, and not for when it doesn't.


But lets be honest. a 50MB free app downloaded by 1000 people per month will never reach the level of expenses you are listing for CDN. Most of these companies already have a website (take my credit union, they are small enough not to exceed that, and already have a website). My credit union covers limited territory, they don't care about a national or global CDN. Many of these companies have business outside of the initial App, and are quite capable of deciding whether they would benefit from using what they already have or completely relying on Apple, other than they have no choice if they want to stay relevant in 2020. People here act like most businesses have a choice to not be online or mobile in 2020. Not being on a mobile platform, even for a small local business, can be a disadvantage.

 

[Regbial]

So what? Just because Disney is an epic customer does not give Disney a reason to care about the App Store.

And the reason developers have difficulty making money is that there are too many of them, and they all charge too little. In the early days we charged reasonable, sustainable, amounts. Then 10,000 kids in their living rooms clone ideas and charge nothing (but shove ads in). That’s the developers’ fault. Not apple’s.

You sure...? Shouldn't Apple have had some better quality control in their store...? hmmm.....

There's a reason they are so damn desperate to push Apple Arcade... (spoilers: they messed up and can't clean the mess now)

 

[LeeW]

They will when the government tells them too and they are already being looked into, it’s cute how you and others keep conveniently forgetting this little detail 🙄

I see you are suspended which says a lot but you conveniently missed where I said "whether right or wrong", I am not defending Apple, simply stating the facts. They are not going to roll over, not for this event, they will fight it as they are not going to lose. Litigation from Epic won't change anything Apple is doing.

 

[AndiG]

Can you afford the backend of the AppStore when you do everything on your own? Well - depends. Epic? For sure it could! The little developer earning its 5 bucks in a quarter? Certainly not.
For myself - my first app made ~60K within three months. Basically it made 85K but Apple wanted its share - that‘s roughly 100K a year -just for the AppStore. Expensive, isn‘t it? But ok. We had the AppStore, the Marketing and without Apple the project wouldn‘t exist. But this was in 2010 (And by the way most of the money was spent for third party license fees including AppStore fees - not very much left for me).

But now it is 2020 and Apple is abusing its dominant role. Charges huge amounts of money for a simple InApp transaction PayPal could as well and as safe, blocks apps it doesn’t like (like video game streaming) or removes Apps others don‘t like (like China or Trump) and finally it copies apps and services from others (Apple music vs Spotify, TV+ vs Prime and Netflix) And enters an unfair competition (Spotify would have to pay 30% - Apple Music doesn‘t).

That said, the AppStore simply cannot go on like it did before. There has to be some change.

 

[Realityck]

Apple will use lawyers from Gibson Dunn, the same firm that spearheaded the second Apple v. Samsung action, in its bid to fend off a private antitrust suit leveled by Epic Games, according to software patent and litigation expert Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents.

Hmm took MacRumors 10 hours to make this thread after I posted this news in a another thread. You guys are slow!

 

[4jasontv]

Actually, it does very little good for most companies to not offer app store distribution, most that want an option to distribute separately would probably do both.

If it wasn't for the 30% IAP I doubt Epic would object to paying a reasonable distribution cost on their free apps and using their store. Sure, they'd like to offer their own store, but I doubt Fortnite for example would be exclusive to their own store.

"Reasonable."

LOL.

How about this? I think it's 'Reasonable' that Epic can either make games or make game tools. They shouldn't be competing with their own customers. Especially since they have access to builds of the Unreal engine that others do not. They are abusing their monopoly on the Unreal Engine.

Or how about Epic pays Apple a 30% royalty on top of the 30% Apple gets for the App sale on all apps that use Unreal?

Seems reasonable.

Or by 'Reasonable' did you mean changes that lowers Epics costs.

 

[avkills]

“Virtually nothing”.

Let’s you develop the hardware, develop the OS and develop the store that this all relies upon, plus host, distribute and transact the apps, and consider your work “virtually nothing”.

I am curious, what apps have you developed that currently appear in the Apple App Store? Some good ones, I trust?

Nobody is going to buy the hardware without 3rd party applications. And the "Mac Computer" platform seemed to be doing just fine without an App Store. Yes it does make it more secure overall; but on the desktop in a lot of ways it makes it a pain in the ass.

 

[fernelius]

So if Apple took away their app store, just for sake of argument, you'd have the resources to reliably host your app for download, market it, collect payment and provide the security and support services to deal with refund requests and make sure no-one is tampering with your app before customers download it? You'd have a way to do all that for free? Power, space, Internet connection, etc? I pretty much guarantee that isn't the case. Amortize those costs out for personal hosting vs your sales for most developers and I'd bet it's comes out much higher than 30%.

Yea, Apple make running the app store look easy to the developers and world at large. Have you seen any of the stories about the data centers they run to keep those services running? Do you think all that hardware, power and admin is free?
I can't argue that it's worth 30% in total but I know it's not free, and it's certainly more than the 3% you cite for processing fees.
This is a lot like the argument on drug prices: the second pull costs $1, the first one costs millions to billions. The app store process is only "free" when you ignore all the capital investment to set it up and support resources to maintain it in an operational state 24/7.

I agree with this post. But I’d add the cost of development and documentation of XCode, the development and documentation of all the various APIs, the cost of WWDC, support to developers in other forms, etc... Without the App Store and supporting only Apple-developed apps, Apple’s costs would be far less. They could immediately deprecate old APIs and not carry them forward for a time, etc...