Apple Says Fortnite for iOS Isn't Blocked Worldwide, Just the U.S.

[surferfb]

Exactly. The original reason they were banned from the App Store (attempting to offer a payment mechanism outside of Apple's control) has been struck done by a US court. The original ban reason is subsequently null and void.

No, it’s not. Read the judge’s order.

Edit: to save you the Googling, from Page 179 of the order:

(i) Apple’s termination of the DPLA and the related agreements between Epic Games and Apple was valid, lawful, and enforceable, and (ii) Apple has the contractual right to terminate its DPLA with any or all of Epic Games’ wholly owned subsidiaries, affiliates, and/or other entities under Epic Games’ control at any time and at Apple’s sole discretion.

 

[Abazigal]

So how many decades will it take for mobile computing platforms to resemble their desktop counterparts, because its been nearly two decades since the iPhone was initially released, and people are ready to be treated like adults and not be contained within a walled garden.

Maybe I don't want mobile computing to resemble their desktop counterparts, because in my opinion, it would actually represent a step backwards. To me, it's not about being treated like an adult, but respecting one's choice to "not have a choice" by way of actively voting with your wallet and buying into the Apple ecosystem as compared to Android. Openness and complexity is not the selling point here for me. Simplicity and ease of use is.

For starters, I own both an iPad and a Mac (2 actually), and so I am happy that my iPad is different from my Mac. I honestly have zero desire to run macOS on my iPad.

Second, not being able to sideload also means less risk of being tricked into downloading malware via scam ads and then being fleeced of your life savings.

Third, I maintain that having all your apps in one central App Store represents the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of users, compared to having to install and manage multiple app stores.

Fourth, I wonder how the developers pushing for more freedom will feel when the tables are turned and their apps end up beng pirated aggressively. There is a few reasons why developers generally make more money on iOS. One is that piracy is much harder on iOS (especially with Apple cracking down on jailbreaking), so people who want apps often pay for them the honest, good-old fashioned way. In contrast, one commonly-cited reason for wanting to sideload on Android is the Revanced app, a third party YouTube app designed to block ads (as opposed to simply paying for YouTube premium).

IMO, the real conversation can only start when people stop positioning features like sideloading as basic rights or must-haves, while sweeping every legitimate concern under the carpet using the motherhood statement "you don't have to sideload if you don't want to". At the end of the day, everything is a tradeoff. Even freedom. I chose the walled garden because I believed (and continue to believe) that the pros outweigh the cons.

 

[racerhomie]

Make Epic Bleed at every turn Apple. That $100 Million Legal Bill should just be the start!

 

[BC2009]

Unconstitutional? You want to cite what part of the constitution that this ruling violates?

You may disagree with it, and that's fine, but the anti-steering ruling was already appealed to the Supreme Court, by Apple, and they declined to review it. It stands.

Additionally, every single developer on the App Store has paid to be there. No one is on there for free.

“Takings clause” from the 5th Amendment:

… nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The federal court just ordered Apple to provide free access to their intellectual property with no license fees.

Apple Files Emergency Motion to Pause ‘Extraordinary’ App Store Ruling on Anti-Steering Injunction

Link to: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/05/08/apple-appeals-app-store-ruling-epic-games/

daringfireball.net

 

[WarmWinterHat]

“Takings clause” from the 5th Amendment:



The federal court just ordered Apple to provide free access to their intellectual property with no license fees.

Apple Files Emergency Motion to Pause ‘Extraordinary’ App Store Ruling on Anti-Steering Injunction

Link to: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/05/08/apple-appeals-app-store-ruling-epic-games/

daringfireball.net

That's false. They still have to pay yearly developer fee to access publish on the store.

Nothing is free.

 

[JonathanX64]

Apple’s rigidity is absurd. With U.S. and EU regulators clearly pushing for openness, Apple should embrace flexibility and foresight, learning from Microsoft’s antitrust battles two decades ago. Pettiness won’t serve them well; they should demonstrate cooperation.

True, and there’s another angle to this.

At this point, most people have made their choice between iPhone and Android, and I believe most sales nowadays are upgrades rather than ecosystem switches.

Many Android users chose it because of its perceived openness (doesn't matter if it's true or not), and because they still think iOS is less open, less customisable, less powerful, etc. (obviously mostly untrue, but still).

If Apple keeps up The Evil Corporation attitude, it surely won’t attract that audience.

 

[ZeroInspo]

I think many developers and consumers who are happy about the decision to allow links for payments outside of the AppStore will find that their joy will be quickly spoiled when Apple doubles or even triples the yearly developer fee in an attempt to protect their revenue stream. The end result of this will not be greater consumer choice, but higher prices for everyone. Screenshot this, hang it on your wall or put it in a time capsule, look at it in 3 years and I’ll eat my foot if I’m not right.

Small developers already only pay 15%, so the only winners here are the big guys like Epic et al.

 

[surferfb]

That's false. They still have to pay yearly developer fee to access publish on the store.

Nothing is free.

I suspect Apple would argue that the $99 is not “just compensation” for their intellectual property. But I suppose we’ll find out soon enough.

The more interesting to me question is whether or not California courts ruling that Apple’s anti-steering language was not in violation of California law will matter. State courts’ interpretation of their state’s laws is supposed to override a federal court’s interpretation of that law.

The judgment for Apple in Beverage directly conflicts with the judgment against Apple here. The federal judgment rests on the district court’s determination that California courts would find Apple’s anti-steering provisions “unfair” under the UCL. In Beverage, the California courts adjudicated the exact same claim against Apple and reached the opposite conclusion, expressly rejecting the federal courts’ construction of state law. See id. at 756 n.6 (“We … do not find [the federal] decisions persuasive on the precise issue presented by this appeal.”).

 

[turbineseaplane]

I suspect Apple would argue that the $99 is not “just compensation” for their intellectual property. But I suppose we’ll find out soon enough.

Isn't that all they get from free Apps?

It seems a little odd (greedy) to "want money" just because an App is charging customers for their own work or product.

 

[ZeroInspo]

Isn't that all they get from free Apps?

It seems a little odd (greedy) to "want money" just because an App is charging customers for their own work or product.

Which they can only sell because Apple built the infrastructure for them to do so. Some malls charge rent and a fee based on sales, if they are allowed to do that I don’t see why Apple isn’t.

There are an abundance of metaphors in this thread that explain why logically Apple should be able to charge a percentage of sales. I recommend reading them so you can better understand why they are in the right here.

That being said, the right play here for Apple should have been to allow third party stores on their devices as a concession. I don’t think a great deal many people would like to manage multiple app stores, and multiple subscriptions on them. But because they want to keep their store as the only store, they now opened the door for developers to use their infrastructure without paying a fair fee (which It’s not clear to me that $99/yr is, maybe monthly so that it works more like an actual rent)

 

[surferfb]

Isn't that all they get from free Apps?

I suspect that will be the argument against. I’m obviously not a lawyer, but it seems reasonable to me that Apple is allowed to set its pricing however it sees fit, particularly in a case where Apple has been ruled to not be a monopoly.

It seems a little odd (greedy) to "want money" just because an App is charging customers for their own work or product.

I don’t see a problem with “sharing the wealth”. Apple’s IP (and customer base it has attracted) is clearly of value to developers. I think it’s absolutely fair to ask developers to “share the wealth” with an 15% to 30% commission.

Obviously reasonable people disagree on this.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I don’t see a problem with “sharing the wealth”. Apple’s IP (and customer base it has attracted) is clearly of value to developers. I think it’s absolutely fair to ask developers to “share the wealth” with an 15% to 30% commission.

Then they should be doing that for every app, and not excluding the ones that have the size and power and leverage to get out of it.

It also shouldn’t be arbitrary… having the categories for reader apps for instance, it’s just ridiculous

You’re either claiming you’re adding all this value and ecosystem and letting people use your IP and charging for it or you’re not.

I just want make a point about the power and leverage part.

The fact that there are companies that have the market position and size and scale to force Apple to give them a better financial deal is exactly why we have jurisdictions trying to intervene on behalf of developers that do not have that ability.

 

[turbineseaplane]

To be clear

I’m totally fine with Apple charging whatever they want in their own store, but that should not be the only way to distribute apps on iOS.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Not letting a company whose US developer account was removed for blatant ToS violations, and is now trying to use their Swedish account in an attempt to “ban-dodge”, it would seem.

I have no strong opinion about Epic either way, but I just wanna point out this is inaccurate.

I heard an interview with Sweeney last week where he mentioned they were in Direct contact with Apple developer relations, and there was no hiding what they were doing in terms of resubmitting with a different account. He says they were actually told to do that.

 

[AppleFan91]

I have no strong opinion about Epic either way, but I just wanna point out this is inaccurate.

I heard an interview with Sweeney last week where he mentioned they were in Direct contact with Apple developer relations, and there was no hiding what they were doing in terms of resubmitting with a different account. He says they were actually told to do that.

Your source (though you didn’t provide any link, so I’m taking you at your word here) is a man who was caught in a lie about Apple blocking Fortnite worldwide when that wasn’t the case, just earlier today?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Your source (though you didn’t provide any link, so I’m taking you at your word here) is a man who was caught in a lie about Apple blocking Fortnite worldwide when that wasn’t the case, just earlier today?

I doubt he was lying about being in contact with Apple dev relations. I'm sure there's been a LOT of that, and they do have the Euro account that's active.

I'd encourage everyone to be skeptical of both Epic & Apple in this.

This has become personal between them and they've both shown a willingness to publicly and privately skew the narratives in their favor.

Here's the episode

How to fight Apple and (maybe) win, with Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney

Podcast Episode · Channels with Peter Kafka · 05/06/2025 · 34m

podcasts.apple.com

Great podcast by the way.

Peter Kafka has been excellent for years

 

[The_Gream]

I asked the other day in a different post if the anti-steering was a California law. I am glad to finally see a post about it.

From what I remember from civics class back in school, a Federal Judge does not have the authority to enforce a company to comply to a state law and definitely doesn’t have the right to force compliance of said state law upon the other 49 states.

If they feel a company is in violation of a state law they would need to have the state review the issue and make a judgment.

As your quote shows, Apple was found by the state of California to not be in violation of their anti-steering law. In this case the Federal Judge would have no grounds to stand on. They already said Apple has a right to do business with whom they please, that Apple is not a monopoly, and with the State of California saying Apple is not in violation of their anti-steering law, then Apple won that case hands down and all these other cases are a waste of tax player and customer money.

 

[soundwarp]

Update from epic games

 

[turbineseaplane]

Update from epic games

Thx for that

 

[lazyrighteye]

Apple will be fine without Epic. Not sure the inverse is true - and why Sweeney is leveraging such amateur/desperate tactics.
Again, if I were on Epic’s board, he’d be gone by morning.

 

[I7guy]

Thx for that

View attachment 2511435

Yep, I guess apples lawyers feel that Apple can still block epic in the US. Another game played by epic.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Yep, I guess apples lawyers feel that Apple can still block epic in the US. Another game played by epic.

I will leave the speculation to you and others.

Honestly, I don’t trust either party here as this has gotten super personal and they have both shown a propensity and willingness to bend the narratives here.

 

[I7guy]

To be clear

I’m totally fine with Apple charging whatever they want in their own store, but that should not be the only way to distribute apps on iOS.

That’s the rub, I think it’s okay they are okay they are the sole distributer of apps in their platform. The eu disagrees. The US agrees.

 

[turbineseaplane]

That’s the rub, I think it’s okay they are okay they are the sole distributer of apps in their platform. The eu disagrees. The US agrees.

Yep.. might just be destined to have two different worlds depending on where people live.

 

[OGdrknight]

I knew it!

Now, can we please move on?