Since when did “common sense” become the same thing as 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.
Epic Games Asks Court to Allow Fortnite Back on the App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Since when did “common sense” become the same thing as the law?
Sony and the rest don’t have to prove their devices aren’t mobile computing devices. They aren’t parties to the lawsuit. The court can’t order them to do anything.
Reading through the litany of posts, I find it common that the pro Epic entries mostly seem to be from newbies. Could Epic be astroturfing on as many forums as they can find?
No, their suing with the hope that if anything changes (either through the suit, through other legislative action or public reaction), they can use it as leverage to force changes in the console market. The truth is that Apples charges at industry standards, so they are no more evil that the industry as a whole, in this regard.
And at the same time some of our most inveterate Apple bashers have been strangely absent from these Epic threads.
You really think so? How about you hypothetically send me $100? If you would rather quantify your loss by actually sending the money I'm fine with that...
I did know about that deal, and if you think that Sony’s $250 million investment will keep Epic from suing them if Epic think they can make a great deal more money doing so, then you have been paying almost no attention of any kind whatsoever to how Epic have historically done business.
As for contingencies to protect from lawsuits, Epic signed an agreement with Apple as well, but that didn’t stop Epic from suing them.
Ripped off??? As a hobby developer, I have to say that the arrangement suits me very well. I worry that the real agenda involves breaking the protection that Apple’s closed ecosystem provides to users.
I believe the fellow is referring to the practice under the law of establishing a clear record of losses. Now they could have easily done this in a bunch of ways however Epic chose to do it in the way they did tied to a marketing campaign. Enabling the update and having Apple use their "monopoly power" to remove it would have been enough to trigger this, being off the App Store for a week or two could have set the grounds for the real damages incurred, as well as demonstration of potential lost profit from the allegedly illegal contract (more than 50% of users when presented with Epic as a payment option chose the competitive option). All of these things create a record of evidence that they can raise in court, some of which you can see in this filing.
That doesn't mean they had to be intentionally antagonistic towards Apple by creating a parody of their 1984 advertising campaign, trying to launch a social media campaign, Tim openly attacking and denigrating Apple on social media or attempting to consume Apple's resources by knowingly sending Epic's customers to AppleCare to resolve an issue that Epic themselves created. At the end of the two week period Apple gave them, they could have "capitulated" to Apple and put the game back as per the suggestion from the judge but Epic didn't choose this.
They are seeking equitable relief, not damages - at least that’s what I heard Epic’s lawyer say in court, when she said there would be no jury trial (if Epic sought money in the lawsuit, apple would have a right to a jury trial).
So the whole question of damages is not really an issue Here.
Since Epic did not cure their breach before the deadline, are they still welcome back if they revert the payment processing update? Or will Apple enforce the one-year timeout for the misbehaving toddler that is Sweeney?
I’m sure anyone using Unreal Engine is seriously reconsidering their choice given the unpredictable and dishonest behavior on display by Sweeney. I wouldn’t want to be relying on any agreement I’d signed with them, I’m sure of that. Never know when he might decide to tear it up.
I’m sure anyone using Unreal Engine is seriously reconsidering their choice given the unpredictable and dishonest behavior on display by Sweeney. I wouldn’t want to be relying on any agreement I’d signed with them, I’m sure of that. Never know when he might decide to tear it up.
wait wait 8 or 9 if macbook arm will be release.. if yes all developer will be irk mode also.. What epic does kinda good actually for developer.. Will be sideload like normal in macos ? Will see..
I don’t. The Unreal Engine is a fine thing, and the fact that it supports macOS and iOS is greatly to our benefit. I should be very sorry to see it disappear.
When it comes to Fortnite and the App Store, however, I have very little, if any, sympathy for Epic.
When I started following these stories, I honestly had no opinion on the matter. But here’s a company that has made billions now complaining that the 30% that Apple (and all their distribution partners) charge is predatory, all in a disingenuous campaign to be allowed to install their own Epic Games Store on everyone else’s devices.
Is 30% still a reasonable cut? (When Apple introduced the 70/30 split, it was more generous to developers than what they ever got from physical distribution.) Would 20% or 15% be better? I really have no idea.
Do I want a world where every heavyweight app developer can muscle Apple into lowering their percentage? Where Epic, Microsoft, and Adobe pay 10% while small, independent app developers pay 30%? Or where we have to suffer repeated disappearances of software every time a developer decides to pressure Apple into lowering their cut?
Not particularly, and I can see why Apple don’t want to start down that road.
Do I want a world where every single commercial app developer can upload a free demo version of their app, with a link in the app to the developer’s web site where the user can purchase virtual currency that can then be used to unlock the full functionality of the app, without Apple receiving a penny? Certainly not.
Since the introduction of the App Store, Apple have distributed free apps for free, at their own expense, because there has been a fine tradition of quality freeware on the Mac which Apple have wanted to encourage. If this free distribution mechanism is abused by companies that make billions off of “freemium” apps, that free distribution will go away, and we will all suffer.
Do I want a world where Apple loses much of their revenue from the operation of the App Store? If app review times substantially increase, or if security review is compromised, we all suffer.
Do I want a world where anyone can offer any software they like to my device, without any vetting by Apple? On macOS, yes, I most certainly do. On iOS, I do not. If I did, I’d have bought an Android device.
Last edited:
as mention above will you can you sideload future in macos arm ? What epic does just playing the field on insecurity apple.
You continue to fail to read what is written. I'll repeat again "You have no idea what it says in Sony's $250 million investment deal". There could be any number of clauses that would cause Epic to give up their rights to sue for any given situations (which is very common in hundred million dollar contracts).
Talk about "paying no attention"
Where in the agreement does it say Epic cannot sue Apple? I read it, and nothing in there says anything remotely close to a developer (like Epic) waiving their rights to sue Apple.
Time and time again, you're proving that you failed to read anything related to support your argument. Because of this, arguing with you is a waste of my time. Feel free to reply, but I'm not going to participate this discussion with you any further.
So it's obvious you have a hard-on for Apple hardware, but simply cannot accept that it was sold to you with very specific limitations. So unless you have been living under a rock since 2008, you did not buy your iPhone without full knowledge that you cannot run alternative app stores.
Just buy an Android device that fits your needs better. Or is it because it then defies your narrative of monopoly.
OR
You can do what you like with the hardware, but it's up to you to figure out how to install from other sources or install alternative compatible OS's that fit your needs better.
What about Chrome Devices, where do they fall into your scenario ?
Should Manufacturers be sued because they cripple the hardware so I cant install Windows on my highly capable Quad i7 Chromebox ?
Thats really a much simpler case as the hardware is 1:1 with a PC's, nothing special except the Bios, but the manufactures chose to only allow Chrome OS to be installed.
The last time they paid their $99 fee did he have any intention of living up to his end of the contract?
California civil code §1572:
ACTUAL FRAUD, WHAT. Actual fraud, within the meaning of this Chapter, consists in any of the following acts, committed by a party to the contract, or with his connivance, with intent to deceive another party thereto, or to induce him to enter into the contract:
....
4. A promise made without any intention of performing it; or,
...
There are no winners in this battle thanks to EPIC. Everyone is a loser but the biggest loser is Epics customers. Time to move on.
Just because there is a duopoly instead of just a monopoly, does not mean that your argument has weight. It embodies how anti-consumer and anticompetitive the smartphone market has become and makes a greater case, not smaller, for regulatory action. The sales numbers make it overwhelmingly clear: Smart Phones are the most widely available general computing devices on the planet. And yet Apple refuses to allow consumers to choose what they run on them. There's an open question of whether or not you will have that ability on ARM Macs moving forward. You don't own Apple devices anymore. You can't fix them. You can't choose what to run on them. Worse of all, the rest of the industry follows their lead, since they make a majority of the profits.
You say ‘anymore’ like that’s a thing. Ever since the first Mac, Steve Jobs has wanted a closed computing appliance like system. Every Apple product (with the possible exception of the wilderness years) has this philosophy built in. Since the first Mac in 1984.
Technology has allowed this and Apple to get to the point it has today.
The iPhone is the ultimate Steve Jobs vision, specifically because it’s locked down, unfixable and impenetrable.
What you’re asking for is a different product by a different manufacturer. This is achieved by buying such an item from the vendors that offer what you want.
Why you or anyone insist that Apple should change their basic computing ideals because of what you want is utterly beyond me.
Last edited:
Oh my god... shall it be a golden trophy or JUST a medal?
I just. That was good. VERY GOOD.
[automerge]1599452950[/automerge]
Yeah uh, no.
Except that in Epic's letter to Apple, they specifically said they want their own Epic store to be downloadable for free from Apple's App Store. 🤣
And Epic also tried to rely solely on side loading on Android devices and lost a bunch of revenue, so they added it back to the Play store...so yeah, they definitely care if it's on Apple's App Store.
No, pretty sure the biggest loser is Epic. Epic’s customers lost, at most, the ability to play some Epic games. At best they gained some free time. Epic lost a ton of revenue.