Epic CEO: Judge's Decision 'Isn't a Win for Developers or for Consumers,' Fortnite Not Immediately Returning to App Store

[cmaier]

There’s still a lot to come on how exactly this decision plays out. But the idea that Apple is coming away from this unscathed is likely a fantasy.

Apple and Epic both lost today

Apple stands to lose billions; Epic failed to #FreeFortnite

www.theverge.com

They are clearly scathed. They will almost certainly have to reduce their commission on in app purchases. But it will have minimal effect on their overall business.

 

[HiVolt]

I still think it's a small victory for developers, and probably more down the road will be coming by regulatory agencies around the world.

 

[bushman4]

Epic becoming a disruptor

 

[Michael Scrip]

He is so annoying to listen to these days; long winded, apple-hating, google-loving.

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?

 

[mdriftmeyer]

There’s still a lot to come on how exactly this decision plays out. But the idea that Apple is coming away from this unscathed is likely a fantasy.

Apple and Epic both lost today

Apple stands to lose billions; Epic failed to #FreeFortnite

www.theverge.com

From a consumer point of view, the average user will not choose a secondary payment system that will extend their credit information to every individual 3rd party developer. In a year, EPIC will be lucky to convince 5% of gamers to use their solution.

 

[mwidjaya]

I'm losing interest in this podcast... which sucks as I've been a weekly listener since before the iPhone was even released.

Likewise, I skip forward when Ihnatko gets on his pedestal. That podcast is meant for Apple enthusiasts. I have no interest in Apple bashing; critique is welcome but straight up bigotry, nah.

Likely to unsubscribe now.

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.

Lost his objectivity when he hosted Google centric podcast - Material?

 

[rukia]

Using the courts to manipulate a private platform TOS, attempting to extract more profit, is difficult if not impossible. The legal system moves very slowly and litigation is extremely expensive. Now we're down parsing legal definitions and then the appeals process will continue for many years. Meanwhile the TOS will be amended with a few keystrokes which will redirect the revenue back to Apple. If Apple has to allow alternative payment processors which reduces the 30% fee that's fine. They can just charge a fee to be listed on the App Store which is indexed to the number of downloads. Most people don't realize that bricks and mortar stores charge vendors a fee to place products on their shelves. Don't like that ? If you litigate and make it illegal they can shift the fees to the the use of the dev tools used to create the games. Perhaps the lawyers can throw in some royalty requirements for the use of XYZ Apple IP. A friend of mine was an exec at a company that spent years litigating against Facebook for their TOS. During the process Facebook had already modified the TOS to make the outcome moot. The partners at these law firms will be happy and the only ultimate winners.

 

[0924487]

Seems like a fair ruling, but yet again, the Government sticking its nose where it doesn't deserve to be, by dictating what a private business does with their product.

It’s the government’s job to rule… it’s just doing it’s job. We need a competitive market. I think the ruling is quite fair.

 

[0924487]

Using the courts to manipulate a private platform TOS, attempting to extract more profit, is difficult if not impossible. The legal system moves very slowly and litigation is extremely expensive. Now we're down parsing legal definitions and then the appeals process will continue for many years. Meanwhile the TOS will be amended with a few keystrokes which will redirect the revenue back to Apple. If Apple has to allow alternative payment processors which reduces the 30% fee that's fine. They can just charge a fee to be listed on the App Store which is indexed to the number of downloads. Most people don't realize that bricks and mortar stores charge vendors a fee to place products on their shelves. Don't like that ? If you litigate and make it illegal they can shift the fees to the the use of the dev tools used to create the games. Perhaps the lawyers can throw in some royalty requirements for the use of XYZ Apple IP. A friend of mine was an exec at a company that spent years litigating against Facebook for their TOS. During the process Facebook had already modified the TOS to make the outcome moot. The partners at these law firms will be happy and the only ultimate winners.

If all else fails, “fear” would be a power tool that can influence a corporation. Those litigations will keep Apple contained. When enough of this is applied, you will get “thrashing“ within a company, that is, the resources needed for fixing previous problems in the company exceeds the resource needed to deal with current and future development plans. The company will implode. Just like MS did during its antitrust, and look what happened to MS Mobile, which was in R&D during that time.

 

[Wildkraut]

Interesting if the EU rules totally differently, i think they will rule even more in favor of EPIC and Devs. Would Apple apply the results of the EU antitrust also to U.S., or will the EU simply have more freedom regarding „alternative Payment, sideloading, open NFC“ than U.S?

Anyway, I’m Looking forward to the next fight, and to the upcoming laws which Apple won’t be able to appeal in any way, except prior lobbying.

 

[cmaier]

Interesting if the EU rules totally differently, i think they will rule even more in favor of EPIC and Devs. Would Apple apply the results of the EU antitrust also to U.S., or will the EU simply have more freedom regarding „alternative Payment, sideloading, open NFC“ than U.S?

Anyway, I’m Looking forward to the next fight, and to the upcoming laws which Apple won’t be able to appeal in any way, except prior lobbying.

At least in the US, the chance of such laws passing is pretty slim. Won’t get through the senate.

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

What on earth are you talking about? Hosting the game? Anyone can have access to global cloud infrastructure by companies like Amazon, Cloudflare, Google, Microsoft and others, and it’s dirt cheap.

I’ll have to stop you right there. It is most definitely not cheap. I’m not sure where you are getting that idea.

Take AWS for example. For even a simple website you’re looking at a cocktail of services— S3, EC2, Route 53, IAM, Elastic Load Balancing, etc. To handle a modest amount of web traffic serving a collection of accessible media files it can easily cost over $50 per month. This isn’t traditional cheap shared web hosting we’re talking about.

Apple is already paying probably millions of dollars per year to Amazon for additional cloud capacity because their own server farms were insufficient for their services growth.

 

[iPadified]

The judge should force all games to have a one time pay option. Subscriptions and pay to win are evil incarnated on so many levels.

Apple do not score points anywhere by destroying smaller players. If devs are treated badly, they will leave iOS at some point. Young gamers are the next generation in Apple ecosystem and treating them badly, which it is when taking a game away, is not a good idea.

 

[mrochester]

The judge should force all games to have a one time pay option. Subscriptions and pay to win are evil incarnated on so many levels.

Apple do not score points anywhere by destroying smaller players. If devs are treated badly, they will leave iOS at some point. Young gamers are the next generation in Apple ecosystem and treating them badly, which it is when taking a game away, is not a good idea.

The judge can no more force developers to do that than they can force Apple to do business with Epic.

 

[Wildkraut]

At least in the US, the chance of such laws passing is pretty slim. Won’t get through the senate.

Maybe, but i think major law reforms for digital goods, devices and linked services will also happens in the U.S., of course those laws won’t only affect Apple.

If I remember correctly there are additional non-EPIC related antitrust investigations ongoing in the U.S, too.

edit: yes there is…

Apple Ruling Shows Need for App Store Law, Lawmakers Say

Some lawmakers said the ruling supports the need for legislation to break the hold that device makers have over their app stores.

www.bloombergquint.com

 

[Da_Hood]

Console launched long before mobile with 30% baked into the price on the console storefronts.
The market agreed this was a fair price, hence the rivers of cash.
It could be argued that the board needs to remove Sweeney for endangering the business.

 

[vipergts2207]

Maybe, but i think major law reforms for digital goods, devices and linked services will also happens in the U.S., of course those laws won’t only affect Apple.

If I remember correctly there are additional non-EPIC related antitrust investigations ongoing in the U.S, too.

edit: yes there is…

Apple Ruling Shows Need for App Store Law, Lawmakers Say

Some lawmakers said the ruling supports the need for legislation to break the hold that device makers have over their app stores.

www.bloombergquint.com

When Marsha Blackburn agrees with two Democratic Senators, that certainly lends credence to the possibility of some kind of legislation being able to pass. Does it? Who knows, but it’s certainly not some foregone conclusion. If there’s one thing both sides agree on right now, it’s their disdain for big tech, though for largely different reasons.

 

[vipergts2207]

Console launched long before mobile with 30% baked into the price on the console storefronts.
The market agreed this was a fair price, hence the rivers of cash.
It could be argued that the board needs to remove Sweeney for endangering the business.

The dude is the company’s controlling shareholder and owns 28% of the company so…

 

[Krizoitz]

Apple can still decide who lives and who dies on the appstore and nuke any developer
at will, without recourse. This is horrible. It just has too much power with the ability to dictate arbitrary rules and add new ones all the time as it sees fit.
Speaking of arbitrary, no other web browser engine than Safari is allowed. That's mind-blowing.

Just like Microsoft can do on Xbox, Sony can do on PlayStation, every WalMart can do, every building owner in America can do, etc. If you depend on someone else’s platform to sell your thing, better be prepared to follow their rules. If you don’t like it make your own platform or go to a competitor. Literally no one is forced to make an iPhone app, they choose to do so because they think it’s worthwhile. And it’s fine to criticize Apple for certain decisions it makes and even advocate for them to change those decisions. But Epic tried to ignore the rules and get Apple to be forced to do whatever they wanted instead. Nope, doesn’t work that way and shouldn’t.

 

[Krizoitz]

If Walmart setup, enforced, and maintained a system whereby they were the only store that over half of consumers were even allowed to shop at, you might have an argument that made an iota of sense.

No one is forced to buy an iPhone. They know what the limitations and benefits are when they do. If they want to use alternative app stores they can get an Android. So yeah, it does make sense.

 

[Krizoitz]

Why are some so opposed to this? It’s not like Apple’s IAP goes away. Most likely any 3rd party IAP would be offered along side Apple’s not in place of. Also none of this applies to non-digital purchases or the reader categories where you can’t buy/subscribe in app. Why is digital different from a security perspective?

Because it absolutely would mean that Apples IAP could be ignored by apps like Epics. Now instead of having a single source where I store my payment info and can track my purchases, subscriptions, etc. I have to do it with every separate entity that wants to set up an IAP. Epic, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. As a consumer I gain nothing except hassle. They aren’t going to lower prices because they aren’t actually competing with each other. They aren’t going to make things more convenient because now I have to juggle more accounts. They gain the ability to take a cut instead of Apple (Epic already does on their store). The only ones who “win” are the IAP operators. The consumer loses.

 

[Krizoitz]

The developer fee more than covers for the cost of hosting an app in the App Store

Even if that’s true, so what? Apple isn’t a non-profit. They can charge for their service whatever people are willing to pay and those that don’t want to pay can choose not to use it. You think anything you buy at a store is sold at cost? The amount of money Apple makes from the App Store was never the issue, there’s nothing illegal about making money. Whether they charge 9% or 90% isn’t relevant so long as they aren’t a monopoly, which they aren’t. No developer is forced to make iOS apps, it’s a choice they make based on whether they think it’s worth it or not. Apple tells them up front what the cost will be for doing so, it’s not bait and switch or anything. Either it’s worth it or it’s not.

 

[SurferPup]

Only consolation I have is that Tim Sweeney has ruined his career opportunities. I will keep my purchases within the App Store to retain the privacy and protection that has been afforded to me to date plus I believe Apple receiving a 30% cut is fair for the creation and maintenance of their App Store.

 

[Eorlas]

Hilarious to see how you believe this was a Tim Cook thing. As if any other ceo would be different.
Btw I am all against alternate app stores. I want my phone to be as much of a closed system as possible.

who said anything about tim cook…other… than…you……………..

 

[Taipan]

I think if I were someone who bought a lot of apps, I‘d rather take the 30% hit in Apple‘s Store than give my data to dozens of developers. And let’s be real, this won’t mean that they are going to be 30% cheaper in other stores. And lastly, app prices are largely < 3$, I couldn’t care less about those 30% (which BTW I never understood; before the iOS App Store, there were hardly any applications to be found for less than 20$; why the 90% inflation?).
Edit: I‘m aware that not all of this applies to in-app purchases.