No, I agree with the judge. But non-lawyers are misinterpreting her words to mean something they don’t mean.
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.
Epic CEO: Judge's Decision 'Isn't a Win for Developers or for Consumers,' Fortnite Not Immediately Returning to App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, I agree with the judge. But non-lawyers are misinterpreting her words to mean something they don’t mean.
Apparently you’re misinterpreting ‘not impossible’ to mean something other than ‘possible.’
This needs said and repeated over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again until it finally sticks.
Success is not illegal. When you use that success to screw over consumers and competition is when it becomes illegal.
It means “possible” - in the sense that the court doesn’t have an opinion one way or the other.
Wait, why would they collect commissions where the payment was externally processed? If that’s the case, that’s trash.
Because, as the law allows and the Judge noted, Apple is entitled to commissions for use of its intellectual property.
Cool, thanks for your input! Interesting idea that I should love everything the company does or get out.
In other words, devs don't get to use Apple's intellectual property for free if a purchase is made. It's one thing for a $0 cost app with no IAP. It's another for an app with IAP. Devs don't get to collect IAP, even if the payment is made to an external processor without a commission to Apple. Although that was the ruling, how this will all work is unknown.
Remember that email from 2010 where Jobs had on their list of priorities that they need to “tie all of our products together, so we further lock customers into our ecosystem”? Seems like we’ve long passed your metric for what’s considered illegal.
Nice straw man there. I never said a thing about you needing to "love everything" Apple does. You claimed that Apple was locking people in to their "profit structure" (whatever that means). I was pointing out the only thing keeping you locked in is your own choices. Nothing to do with loving or not loving everything Apple does.
Huh? CODM, Real Racing, Mobile Legends to name another couple
Because the 30% is NOT a processing fee.
So, he has recklessly endangered the Unreal dev account, in resorting to corporate terrorism.
He may be altruistically seeking a better tommorow for consumers, but his scorched earth approach is not remotely professional, and more akin to a toddler at the helm.
“But in her decision, Gonzalez Rogers did not absolve Apple of having engaged in anticompetitive conduct, and her ruling may provide guidance for future cases against the company, according to legal experts.”
“‘She was especially cautious because she wanted her ruling to have less rather than more impact, and sounds like she’s indicating, “Well, maybe somebody else will prove it. I don’t want to stand in their way of trying, but Epic didn’t prove it here,”’ said Eleanor Fox, a professor at the New York University School of Law.”
“David Kesselman, an antitrust expert and founding partner of Kesselman Brantly Stockinger LLP, said Gonzalez Rogers ‘was sort of leaving, in a way, a potential road map to challenge Apple’s conduct.’”
Hmm, that’s quite similar to what I said yesterday.
thehill.com
“‘She was especially cautious because she wanted her ruling to have less rather than more impact, and sounds like she’s indicating, “Well, maybe somebody else will prove it. I don’t want to stand in their way of trying, but Epic didn’t prove it here,”’ said Eleanor Fox, a professor at the New York University School of Law.”
“David Kesselman, an antitrust expert and founding partner of Kesselman Brantly Stockinger LLP, said Gonzalez Rogers ‘was sort of leaving, in a way, a potential road map to challenge Apple’s conduct.’”
Hmm, that’s quite similar to what I said yesterday.
Court ruling makes Apple vulnerable to more lawsuits
A federal court ruling last week in a case involving allegations of anticompetitive conduct against Apple opened the door for more lawsuits against the tech giant, while also adding to momentum on …
thehill.com
No. But you are a rational person. The judge's claim of "considerable market share of over 55%" can be easily disproved by statcounter. Unless you use math that Enron would find envious there is no way to get 55% marketshare out of that data.
Right and Apple hasn't screwed over consumers and competition. Heck Apple doesn't dominate in either the smartphone or PC market. As for the 55% the judge came up with...I have a minor in math with a focus in statistics as well as an accounting degree and I can't figure how she came up with that gonzo percentage.
Using statcounter's numbers for the US even if you just add Apple iOS share (30%) plus an inflated 15% for OS X you only get 45% and as anyone who knows anything about market share knows you should not do that.
I think you're the one with the funny numbers and math here. If we're talking about smartphone OS's, why would we bring Windows and macOS into the discussion? Below is the data you should be looking at, and the market share is right in line with where the judge said it was.
Mobile Operating System Market Share United States Of America | Statcounter Global Stats
This graph shows the market share of mobile operating systems in United States Of America based on over 5 billion monthly page views.
gs.statcounter.com
I lost interest in this podcast ages ago. or for that matter all of Leo's podcasts.Agreed.
And last week's episode was especially bad... with him and Alex getting into a big fight.
I'm losing interest in this podcast... which sucks as I've been a weekly listener since before the iPhone was even released.
I've always enjoyed Alex since he tends to talk about video production and stuff. I remember he had a show a long time ago called "This Week in Media" and I watch his "Office Hours" show on Youtube once in a while. (I'm a video production nerd)
But like you say, Andy goes on these long rants... and he doesn't even use an iPhone anymore. Neither does Leo... and he's a fulltime Linux user now.
Shouldn't the host of Macbreak Weekly use a Mac?
The problem is that is cherry picking the market. In South America and India Android so crushes iOS it isn't even funny, the two OSs are in neck and neck horse race in the UK, and iOS is behind Android in marketshare everywhere else. Compare that to Microsoft whose Windows OS is way above any OS out there in every regional market.I think you're the one with the funny numbers and math here. If we're talking about smartphone OS's, why would we bring Windows and macOS into the discussion? Below is the data you should be looking at, and the market share is right in line with where the judge said it was.
Mobile Operating System Market Share United States Of America | Statcounter Global Stats
This graph shows the market share of mobile operating systems in United States Of America based on over 5 billion monthly page views.
Huh, it’s almost like US judges are concerned about the US marketplace and US laws.
But such a minor market dominance is not an example of a monopoly. Heck, that chart shows a decline of Apple's percentage (from a high of 61.47% in Jan 2021) to 56.7% in Aug 2021. You also seems to conveniently forget that Epic was also suing Google alleging "that Google’s payment restrictions on the Play Store constitute a monopoly, and thus a violation of both the Sherman Act and California’s Cartwright Act." (Epic is suing Google over Fortnite’s removal from the Google Play Store)
That suit didn't make any sense until last month (The Epic v. Google lawsuit finally makes sense) and even that ignores the stealth buy out of stuff that got money via Kickstarter by saying to be on Steam at the same time as other platforms becoming an Epic exclusive on release (Can you say Shenmue 3, neighbor?).
“[T]he goal is draw Google into a legal battle over anti-trust,” wrote Epic marketing director Haseeb Mailk in a September 2019 email. “If we are rejected for only offering Epic’s payment solution. The battle begins. It’s going to be fun!” Same BS they pulled with Apple.
I’m not going to get back into the weeds on the whole saga that’s been talked about endlessly in various threads. My post was simply to correct your misunderstanding of where the iOS marketshare numbers were coming from.
Still doesn't change the fact that Epic is sueing Google in a US court for also being monopoly. It is like Epic doesn't (or the Law) even understand the freaking world. It has mono (one) right in the name. Perhaps they (both) need to watch an old (1970s) episode of PBS' Wordsmith.
Still doesn't change the fact that Epic is sueing Google in a US court for also being monopoly. It is like Epic doesn't (or the Law) even understand the freaking world. It has mono (one) right in the name. Perhaps they (both) need to watch an old (1970s) episode of PBS' Wordsmith.
I think we should all sue Epic for having a "monopoly" on Fortnite.
And why can't I sell my own skins and costumes in Epic's store? They have a "monopoly" on that too!