Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Weren't they told two weeks ago what they needed to do to stay in the store?
I thought the court told them that they created this situation (or something in a non-sympathetic tone).
The previous hearing was for a temporary restraining order (TRO). This next hearing for a preliminary injunction.

Epic is saying that since they have such a high likelihood of eventually winning their case, the court should grant them what they’re asking for in advance.

Good luck, the judge already said she wasn’t so sure about that when she denied their TRO request. Maybe this new filing will convince her otherwise but it would seem to be a heavy lift.
 
Obviously they could sue for something else other than the context of this article but that's not what we're talking about.

He does not even rule out suing in this context. He says “I don’t have as much of a problem with them” and then talks about the future where they can sel everywhere. He doesn’t come close to saying he won’t sue them about this. Just that he isn’t suing them NOW.
 
Personally, the issue isn't 30% or 15% or whatever. That Apple doesn't even allow a developer to redirect their customers to their own website to complete their subscription is the most problematic. That developers can't even SAY that the subscription fee is 30% more because of Apple's fees is seriously problematic and unarguably anticompetitive. I believe this will irk the courts the most, and is probably their strongest argument.

I can see your point, but consider the alternative. If apps were allowed to completely and always bypass the fees from the App Store by selling everything on their website, all apps would be free and you would be constantly forwarded to endless sites whenever you wanted to pay for anything. This also brings up increasingly higher risks of identity theft and fraud... not even to mention the fact Apple would never receive any funding for the service of the App Store they provide.

as I’ve said before, I’m not 100% on apples side of 30% here, but NOONE has explained or provided a logical alternative beside “just let apps charge how they want” - which just means Apple shouldn’t get any money - which is patently absurd.

But maybe someone can explain some way to me that provides Apple a legitimate fee for providing the service of the App Store...
 
ONG Really? You really believe that Epic actually care about indie developers?

Just what exactly has Tim Sweeney done to get that vote of confidence? Not said, but what actions have you seen from Epic to demonstrate this will help the little guys and gals?
distribution as many times i mention. It never ever about %.

Web based allready in critical limit for ERP business which have large volume data. As constant update to the system or apps, opening the distribution which limit like apple enterprise license is good.

** sometimes customer think,web based can do all the magic like installable application but reality farfetch.
 
Last edited:
He does not even rule out suing in this context. He says “I don’t have as much of a problem with them” and then talks about the future where they can sel everywhere. He doesn’t come close to saying he won’t sue them about this. Just that he isn’t suing them NOW.
The literal quote is "I don't have a problem with the concept of console platform fees". It no longer makes sense for Epic to sue Sony or Microsoft for "console platform fees" as any lawyer can point to this tweet and it would put Epic at a huge disadvantage in the case.

If they were planning to sue them, Tim Sweeney wouldn't have tweeted it. Any lawyer would know this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: derekamoss
Obviously they could sue for something else other than the context of this article but that's not what we're talking about.

The next tweet contains "Consoles could ultimately benefit from richer store ecosystems" which is precisely the change that they're litigating for on the iPhone. Epic has a history of fighting various incumbent stores to get their way, they fought against Microsoft to open up their platforms, they fought and lost against Steam and they've now moved on to Apple and Google. If they were successful against Apple, the exact same arguments would work against the Xbox, Playstation and Switch. The entire "what if" he ends that second tweet with is predicated on having a single store for all of those platforms that could validate that you have the game against, likely in their world the Epic Store. To make that vision work he needs to get the owners of those platforms concede to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Colonel Blimp
The literal quote is "I don't have a problem with the concept of console platform fees". It no longer makes sense for Epic to sue Sony or Microsoft for "console platform fees" as any lawyer can point to this tweet and it would put Epic at a huge disadvantage in the case.

If they were planning to sue them, Tim Sweeney wouldn't have tweeted it. Any lawyer would know this.
Any lawyer would read this and see that he left himself a very easy out and doesn’t say anything about not suing.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: derekamoss
Epic is asking a court to enforce a contract that it broke.

Wow, I wonder what legal theory they're working under, the "I shot myself in the foot because I was stupid" theory?
In fairness to Epic, their position is that the contract is illegal (under the Sherman antitrust act) and therefore Epic shouldn’t be held to it. And if it were an illegal contract, that’s true.

But is there a Sherman Act violation? That’s what this whole case is about. So Epic is back to having to meet the bar that they are likely to succeed in the end. (There are a few other things they have to prove as well on order to get the preliminary injunction.)
 
Nobody is stopped anybody from using their device as they see fit. A person who is an Apple customer however and wants to use an iPhone with iOS, has to use the iPhone as apple has provided the software. A court of law hasn’t invalidated that use case. A person who wants openness and the freedom for endless customization there is android.

To knowingly buy the phone knowing the parameters and then complain about the parameters is folly.
Couldn’t agree more. It would be like buying an electric car, and then trying to sue the manufacturer because you want to use petrol instead. Because you have that right to make the demand. NO. Epic don’t get to dictate the terms. Thank god the many here have the common sense reaction to this. If you buy into the Apple eco system, you know what you’re signing up for. A regulated, App Store where you know the apps aren’t going to riddle your device with viruses. And that’s Apple’s right. It’s their platform. If you don’t like it you have the freedom of choice to go to android. Or whatever other platform you like. What Apple charge is upto them. And frankly looking around the fee is pretty standard across the board. Epic cutting their nose off to spite their face.
 
Any lawyer would read this and see that he left himself a very easy out and doesn’t say anything about not suing.

If Tim said "I don't have a problem with the App Store rules", a reasonable human being would infer that Epic will not be suing Apple because of its rules.

I think you're sort of realizing this and you're trying to find a way out by arguing the literal side of this. So I'm going to end it here with you. Have a good one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Couldn’t agree more. It would be like buying an electric car, and then trying to sue the manufacturer because you want to use petrol instead. Because you have that right to make the demand. NO. Epic don’t get to dictate the terms. Thank god the many here have the common sense reaction to this. If you buy into the Apple eco system, you know what you’re signing up for. A regulated, App Store where you know the apps aren’t going to riddle your device with viruses. And that’s Apple’s right. It’s their platform. If you don’t like it you have the freedom of choice to go to android. Or whatever other platform you like. What Apple charge is upto them. And frankly looking around the fee is pretty standard across the board. Epic cutting their nose off to spite their face.
quite wrong.. what you saying like microsoft windows(europe without internet explorer).
 
How is that: Offering a free app on the AppStore and all InApp purchases outside?
Apple would loose everything and Fortnite could use the billions of devices and superb iOS to generate revenue.
No clear thinking judge will allow such a business model.
I really hope, EPIC will disappear completely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jason2000
It's simple really. The ultimate end goal for Epic is to force Apple to allow third party app stores in iOS devices, so Epic can earn even more $$$$$$$$. Ripping off the benefits of launching their titles on another device not made by them.

In a consumer's perspective, do you really want that? I already have Steam, Origin, Epic, Uplay launchers on my computer to play games. It's a hassle.

iOS is clean and carefully curated. So I hope Apple wins on this one. It is the lesser evil.
 
Will we see Epic swallow their pride and pay the 30% cut??
Thats on the next episode on Tech Court Fights!
 
The literal quote is "I don't have a problem with the concept of console platform fees". It no longer makes sense for Epic to sue Sony or Microsoft for "console platform fees" as any lawyer can point to this tweet and it would put Epic at a huge disadvantage in the case.

If they were planning to sue them, Tim Sweeney wouldn't have tweeted it. Any lawyer would know this.
Sweeney’s tweet really doesn’t give console maker’s any leverage at all if Epic decides to sue them. People change their minds all the time. He may not even be CEO by the time this Apple case is resolved, and the next CEO may have a huge problem with the fees Sony, MS, Nintendo, etc. charge.
 
Here's what I don't get... Every single one of Apple's moves has been entirely predictable. Of course Apple was going to hold their ground. Of course Apple was not going to let Epic on the App Store for free. Of course Apple was going to kick Epic off the App Store if they tried.

Either Epic's lawyers were too daft to realize this, or it's part of an elaborate legal strategy that I'm really not seeing. I guess they want a long and expensive legal battle, because that sure as hell doesn't scare Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paulmeyers42
LOL 7 out of 108 thumbs downed your post 😂
LOL did you really expect something else in here on “macrumors”?

That would be like walking into a church, and yell that god does not exist. How many virtual thumbs up/down do you think the yeller would get there? 🤣 But this doesn’t mean that the rest of world shares the same “pro god/Apple” attitude...
 
Last edited:
This could be used, if epic is smart, to force apple to allow third party app instalation on i devices. Without jail breaking their phones.
if you want to jailbreak an iPhone, because you want to change what's on it, and how it looks, then buy an android and go play. The beauty of the iOS devices is that they are safe, they are reliable, and that 'foreign' invaders and sandboxed.
 
wow, what a whiney company. I invite Epic to open their own App Store and charge their devs whatever they feel is fair. Oh wait they already did. I wish nothing but failure for Epic, and my sentiments predate this debacle.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.