Unless said clause is determined as being non-enforceable in court or any other methods of dispute resolution - contract are just that, contracts, not the law.
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 Threatens to Terminate Epic Games' Developer Accounts on August 28
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unless said clause is determined as being non-enforceable in court or any other methods of dispute resolution - contract are just that, contracts, not the law.
And you don’t think it’s the same for the publisher?
Which brings me to the general comment I was going make on this subject...
Enter a p**sing contest, you’re bound to get at least some splash damage.
Then why did they got summon by the govt and went to it? Simply they can't do whatever they want.
Nope, not even close. For Home depot and amazon for example I can go elsewhere to get exactly the same product. For Apple and others that lock in, there is only one place to buy.
It's like only be able to go to the Ford dealer to get Ford accessories/parts. We all agree that is not desirable. Now, some people will only go to Ford for everything (which is fine if you only trust Ford and no-one wants to remove that), but lots of people go elsewhere. Its call freedom and competition. I don't switch over to owning a Chevy truck because Chevy is the only manufacturer that has the running boards I want.
Remember folks, we are supposed to own the iPhone, but Apple insists that we can only load pre-approved software. That is non-competitive and monopolistic and Apple should be held to account for the bad behavior.
Sideloading for the masses? Legal issues do matter. Unfortunately the customer may not get what they want as these legalities are being decided. Epic did this purposefully, so this is on them.
It's not anti-competitive to decide how customers pay at your store. You, the store owner, decide if you take mastercard or visa, or both. You decide if you take paypal, or not. Some stores only take debit, some stores debit and credit, some stores Amex, MC and Visa, some stores doesn't take Amex due to fees, some stores only accepts cash. No customer is ever free to decide exactly how to pay anywhere. Is this anti-competitive?
If the fees are forced down, that is not necessarily a benefit to the customers. It might just mean more automated approval processes, which results in less security, less quality, etc. That has been evident on the Goole Play Store for years. If that is the "benefit" of a $1 off an in-app purchase or not, then honestly, as a customer, I don't see it as a benefit AT ALL.
You get what you pay for. And the poor man pays twice.
Okay, then let’s wait and see what happens in court.
I just can’t understand why everyone is kicking up such a fuss. It must be because it’s Epic because I sure as hell don’t haven’t seen this amount of reaction from any other studio that has raised concerns about the App Store.
I’m all for Epic Games being removed given their violation of T&C’s. They basically add no value to society, targeting people (kids) with addiction problems and encouraging tiny but millions of in-app game purchases. But that’s just my opinion.
It’s ironic how Epic are orchestrating the attack mainly on Apple. There is no doubt Epic make most of their money from iOS platform, why else would they be using Apple as the go-to. It’s funny that? Because Apple have by far the biggest, most popular and successful App platform, yet Epic aren’t happy that Apple therefore make more revenue than the other platforms.
But in support of all other developers and as a non-developer, could someone explain what the 30% cut is for and does Apple/Sony/Google state how the fee was devised? And is it reasonable?
I assume a large portion would be advertising the platform, Building SDK’s, maintenance of platform, improvements, security etc.
It’s ironic how Epic are orchestrating the attack mainly on Apple. There is no doubt Epic make most of their money from iOS platform, why else would they be using Apple as the go-to. It’s funny that? Because Apple have by far the biggest, most popular and successful App platform, yet Epic aren’t happy that Apple therefore make more revenue than the other platforms.
But in support of all other developers and as a non-developer, could someone explain what the 30% cut is for and does Apple/Sony/Google state how the fee was devised? And is it reasonable?
I assume a large portion would be advertising the platform, Building SDK’s, maintenance of platform, improvements, security etc.
Agreed. Apple isn't no saint either.Epic is not quite the saint you think they are. This is about money, case closed. (Same can be said for Apple — but I’ve never pretended Apple isn’t a for-profit company)
Epic’s battle for “open platforms” ignores consoles’ massive closed market
Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo demand the same platform control—and the same 30% fee.arstechnica.com
Apple to pay $450m settlement over US ebook price fixing
The US supreme court has decided not to hear Apple’s appeal against a 2015 ruling that it violated price-fixing laws by conspiring with five publishers
They should have picked different tooling. “Signing on” to the lawsuit doesn’t change the results of the lawsuit, and just puts targets on their back. They have no skin in the game - why would they do that?
most software on apple is cross platform so you can go somewhere else. yes there is a lot of apps that are ios only but then that's the equivalent of store brands in your analogy. you can't buy Safeway Select soda at Target and you can't get Target's UpandUp products at Whole Foods.
Way to miss the point. The analogy he gave was he wants the car DELIVERED that way. Why should Ford dealers be allowed to prevent Chevy from selling its engines in mustangs, after all?
I think the bigger issue for Apple is the WeChat ban. If Trump bans it, I can see Apple allowing side loading for apps to save China region.
They are probably not after a store on iOS, but their main business runs on top a platform which can kick them off anytime, or simply demand stuff they dislike. Most Unity subscribers are iOS and Android devs, but it's too dangerous to have a business running like this, this kind of business has a big potential to fail sooner or later.
Epic has the better and more successful non-mobile business model.
The mobile platform was just one of many.
If you have a subscription via an IAP, and you've had it for a year, do you ever get a lower cost as a consumer when the developer is switched from 30 % to 15 %?
Screw Epic games, I'm with Apple on this one. I've despised them since Cliffy B left, and they let Unreal Tournament rot on the vine for 4 years in a pre-alpha state, and then swiftly put all their eggs in one basket with that abomination Fartnite. They are also effectively 50% owned by the CCP since Tencent's majority stake acquisition... I have no intention of ever supporting them again.
See Apple terminates Epic Games iOS/Mac developer accounts in latest salvo - millenium.us.org 8/17/20
Are the consumers just cattle fodder to Apple now? Your expressing this in the terms that EPIC is totally responsible for Apple pulling the plug on accessing their paid for games. Isn't that pretty harsh on consumers? They should have halted sales not halted access, but now they taken it further than they should.
Last edited:
Cook took over a golden egg from Steve. Not the same thing.
Why do kids today think anything they don’t like is either Communist or Nazi... Please take a history class or two 🤦♂️
Unity (the company) aren't selling anything on the AppStore. How can they be banned?
Any single game or app that uses the Unity engine can of course be banned, but that's got nothing to do with the Unity product itself, that's simply because the developer that used the Unity framework for their app/game got their app or game banned for some reason.
Apple isn't banning the Unreal engine. It is banning Epic's entire Apple Developer account because they breached contracts and terms of service that Epic legally agreed to when they signed up.
It's like doing a traffic offense where you loose your license because what you did was illegal, and then you lost your license. And then you started crying about it, because you don't think it's right. Well, during driving school, you probably learned what was legal and not legal to do. And you probably had to take a test to prove that you understood the rules. And then if you don't play by the rules you agreed to, your license is revoked. Naturally. Doesn't that make complete sense?
Guess what, actions and decisions has consequences.
Last edited:
Are we really comparing Apple charging a fee for the app store to slavery...
The govt will enforce rules for Apple like they did w/ MS back then. If they don't comply, they simply have to pay a fee that's all. MS paid like 1M dollar a day for not removing windows explorer browser from their OS. If the govt get mad enough, they'll do something more drastic.