Legal Discovery. The lawyers go to the judge and make a case gorveach side to provide evidence. Then the judge rules on what each side will provide to the other. That's been going on for several months already
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 Says Epic Games 'Wants Us to Be Android, But We Don't Want to Be'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wonder why Epic didn’t sue console makers then. Is there something different about selling a game on Apple’s or Google’s marketplace compared to Nintendo’s?
And with so many companies out there, isn’t it crazy for Epic to complain that each one is a monopoly? I mean, they are suing Apple and Google (competitors) at the same time, claiming each is somehow a monopoly even though they are competing with each other... it doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
When you purchased an iPhone, were you aware of the restrictions? Were you also aware of competing products that did not have the restrictions? You had a choice, and you chose the product with restrictions. It doesn’t seem to me that you were ignorant of them at the time of purchase.
This isn't about suing the individual(s) its about setting precedence for all other walled garden platforms.
It’s actually simpler than that. Each side sends Requests for Production to the other side, listing categories of documents that it wants to see. The sides negotiate the scope of the requests (for example, negotiating search terms for automated search of electronic documents, or narrowing the scope to apply to documents only from certain years, etc.). Only when there is a dispute does the judge get involved.
I don’t think that’s gonna fly with the judge. And again, if there are so many walled garden platforms, you can’t call them all monopolies because they compete with each other. If they all colluded like the oil and railroad trusts over 100 years ago, then sue them as a trust. But if they’re competing, each one cannot be its own monopoly. That’s completely ignoring the definition of the word.
not quiet so simple though.
A product segment itself can absolutely be monopolized. you can't just say "well, there's a billion other ____, so it's not a monopoly"
you have to look at what the market itself is that is being reference. IN the case of EPIC Vs Apple here, they're not saying "smart phone" is the market
they're claiming iOS users are the market. And by that definition, yes, The App Store is a monopoly on iOS devices.
Why this same argument doesn't get brought up with Adnroid is that you can sideload or straight up install other markets. this is competition, even if 90% of the users use 2 market places.
what the argument you're making is saying that EPIC's whole market is in fact ALL Smart phone users and not just iOS useres, therefore it's not a monopoly. And that IS the whole debate I think at hand.
but I as an iPhone user, would rather not see applications and developers leave iOS reducing the options I have available for me because Apple decided they don't want to part with a couple percentage points on their 30+ billion dollar of quarterly profit.
repeating the "it's not monopolistic because ANDROID" ignores the very very real fact that if you are in iOS system, you have absolutely zero personal agency over where or how you get your apps.
EPIC on the othger hand seems incompetent at their messaging though since they themselves have a long history of abusive poor business practices.
I think Epic's argument is absurd. It would be like arguing that Ford has a monopoly on Ford trucks or that Coca-Cola has a monopoly on Coca-Cola or that Oscar Mayer has a monopoly on Oscar Mayer baloney. There are plenty of other trucks, drinks, and baloney out there, just like there are plenty of other smartphones out there. If Epic had evidence that Apple and Google were colluding, then bring on the lawsuit. Otherwise, it doesn’t stand up at all.
And their market includes computers and consoles as well... of course they’ve set up their own “mini monopoly” on computers where you can only buy Fortnite from the Epic games store... they really are totally inconsistent IMHO.
This is what I hope the Judge ultimately concludes:
1.) If Apple recommended OR promoted an app in ANY way, then Apple is entitled to its agreed-upon cut.
2.) If Apple has NEVER recommended OR promoted an app in ANY way, then Apple's cut should be ZERO !
2b.) And should remain ZERO for the number of days that the app was in the App Store, prior to receiving ANY love from Apple; in other words, if an app has been in the App Store for two years BEFORE Apple show'd it ANY Love, then it stays @ ZERO (cut) for two years, starting from the day it first received Love from Apple.
---
IMO, Epic benefited significantly from Apple's Marketing !
1.) If Apple recommended OR promoted an app in ANY way, then Apple is entitled to its agreed-upon cut.
2.) If Apple has NEVER recommended OR promoted an app in ANY way, then Apple's cut should be ZERO !
2b.) And should remain ZERO for the number of days that the app was in the App Store, prior to receiving ANY love from Apple; in other words, if an app has been in the App Store for two years BEFORE Apple show'd it ANY Love, then it stays @ ZERO (cut) for two years, starting from the day it first received Love from Apple.
---
IMO, Epic benefited significantly from Apple's Marketing !
A lot of the issues I’m having now didn’t exist when I bought my phone. Jail breaking, if you wanted to go that route, was a lot easier back then. This has been a slow slip into where we are now. When I bought my phone, the ecosystem worked well together, the App Store was new, and third-party iot-type devices didn’t exist. Now I’m feeling walled in more and more to using Apple devices exclusively and I don’t like that. That doesn’t mean I’d prefer another phone brand and it’s not unreasonable to want Apple to be more open. I honestly don’t understand the dogged defense of Apple here.
Epic not interested in Apples customers. Epic only interested in $$$$.
Apple has invested mega bucks to create a secure, unique and enhanced experience for its customers. And to those customers playing Fortnite it’s time to move on an teach Epic a lesson. If they flex their muscle we have to flex ours
Apple has invested mega bucks to create a secure, unique and enhanced experience for its customers. And to those customers playing Fortnite it’s time to move on an teach Epic a lesson. If they flex their muscle we have to flex ours
For consoles are we explicitly talking about digital sales, or are we including physical sales in the question?
I think they should sue console makers, I don’t have an issue with that. I don’t play video games so I don’t know what the deal is with them, but if there are similar issues, I say go for it. Even if they don’t win, who cares, I don’t care about Epic, but I like that this is sparking conversations about what these modern monopolies look like. These tech companies do effectively have a monopoly on their users. Sure, there are other devices you can go with, but that comes with a lot of obstacles. Apple isn’t the only one who does this, but they’re the most aggressive and notorious for making the move away from their ecosystem difficult. That’s always one of the primary criticisms of Apple. I would like to see an environment in the tech industry that’s more competitive. If moving between Android or iPhone or PlayStation or Xbox was an easier move to make, we would all win. I don’t see how that’s controversial.
So I presume by your emphatic use of caps that all I need is to provide one more example to disprove your claim...😏
HBO Max is the exact same situation - I purchased the subscription directly thru HBO, then downloaded the iOS/iPadOS apps to watch on my mobile devices. Prime Video too. I'm pretty sure Disney+ is the same although I can't say from personal experience since that one I *did* sign up for thru iOS. That pretty much backs up SuperMatt's assertion about "...can have subscriptions they bought separately and use with the App Store app".
It’s funny how supposedly all iPhone uses are so fully aware of all the restrictions imposed by Apple & IOS and even so they made informed decisions and entirely accept those restrictions willingly, and yet in the story below this one the same folks are stunned to discover that Air Tags can’t be shared and that is a terrible restriction and needs to be fixed as soon as possible?
Pretty sure the "thumbs down" votes aren't a disagreement about game quality, they are about "what the hell does that statement have to do with the topic" comment.
There already IS a door. It is called the App Store. Epic is asking for their own door with their own rules and for anyone else to have the same.
Maybe I am overly suspicious, but I don’t think this is about 30% since Epic seems okay with Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo charging the same. I then question what it is about. A private door with its own security that might circumvent Apple privacy restrictions would be worth a LOT to Facebook and Alphabet. Hmmmmm
Look, just run the price up. The latest skin pack or expansion costs 15% more on iOS. Epic says it covers increased, yet magically identical to other platforms, costs. Apple keeps the keys to the security. If Fortnite is that important to you, pay for it. If going cheap is that important to you, you’re not on Apple products anyway.
People will either pay it or not. If not, maybe it was already too expensive. As I understand it, developers make more money from the iOS store than the Google play in spite of the total number of users. The prevailing theory is that people want free on Android, but will shell out a few bucks to dodge ads, spyware, and what have you on iOS.
Actually, Apple has had a system for this very situation for quite sometime. Corporations often have very specific applications that are needed for their unique corporate environment. Apple allows those apps to be developed locally and installed situationally on corporate devices through a unique profile and loader. Those apps do not go through the App Store verification process and Apple does not warranty the devices if the corporate apps are found to have interfered with the device software. So, I'm not sure your point is relevant. The Epic lawsuit is about games. Games that are available on a plethora of devices. Games that have the in-game purchases available as points that you can pick up in the check-out line of your local grocery store. Opening iOS to 3rd party app stores will not improve the device, its usability, or its security. It will only lead to fragmentation, even more "exclusives" across the market, and general confusion as users are forced to go to an Amazon store (with its inherent tracking) for a Kindle reader, a Microsoft store for Office and Teams, an Adobe store for Acrobat and CreativeCloud apps, an Epic store for the games they sell under $1B+ exclusive licenses, a Steam store for other games, a Origin store for EA games, and on and on and on. Do you really want that?
I could see them deciding to close the digital downloads and just rely on physical sales.
Im asking as I'm trying to workout in what kind of time frame you feel apple and their App Store has changed. Your post sounds like you are still using an iPhone 5/6 or in fact you have a newer iPhone and you have continued to keep buying iPhones despite the changes in apple you have observed
bit difficult that one when Sony sell a diskless PS5 and Microsoft diskless xboxs
Everybody knew from day 1 that jailbreaking was not authorized by Apple, and could stop working at any time. If anybody chose to do otherwise, and is now disappointed that the hack doesn’t work anymore, that is on them, not Apple.
I’m not defending Apple in particular. I am pointing out that they are not a monopoly and nobody is trapped. You weigh the options: Apple vs Android... Android is more open but Apple has many more advantages, some of them even a byproduct of the closed system. Both systems have tradeoffs, depending on what users want. If one wants to switch, they can do so when they get their next phone.
As for the ecosystem... isn’t this entire court case about how it works TOO well? But you are indicating it is working less well, which I don’t think most people are experiencing.
