Epic Games Setting Up Webshops for iOS Developers to Offer Users Out-of-App Purchases

[HighwaySnowman]

Yeah that's true... there is only one choice on iOS.

But all stores take a cut... even if there are multiple stores.

If you sell a product at Best Buy... Best Buy gets a cut.
If you sell a product at Walmart... Walmart gets a cut.
If you sell a product at Target... Target gets a cut.
etc...

And if you sell a product directly... Nobody else gets a cut.

Apple makes that impossible on iDevices, and that should not be legal.

 

[I7guy]

Yeah but it does because that is epic’s argument as to why they don’t go after the games console makers for the same thing

That argument is the same thing. Who determines what “fat” is vs”good” vs “great”. Apple is an easy target.

As apple releases new iPhones every year so in turn they make a fat profit every year

Many companies have yearly release cycles and they make a fat profit. And many companies just make fat profits.

Unlike the game console makers who release new generation every 6 to 7 years
And that’s one of the reasons why epic don’t challenge the console makers

The big and real reason is many people would be pissed off and the industry would be destroyed.

 

[tenthousandthings]

[…] The ultimate issue here is some of us see the market that should be regulated as “mobile applications”, many (most?) on here see it as “iPhone applications”. The reason we’ll never agree on the appropriate level of regulation is we fundamentally don’t agree on how the market should be defined.

I absolutely disagree with the premise that there isn’t competition to the App Store. I completely understand why many of you think I’m crazy for saying that, but it doesn’t change my opinion on the fact.

Let’s not forget that this particular lawsuit and its rulings are defined and focused on a narrow aspect of mobile applications: in-app purchases. It is not about software purchases, subscriptions, side loading, or anything regulating that. Go back and read the judge’s initial ruling, which is precise and explicit about its scope.

Apple refused to accept this court’s ruling enforcing California’s anti-steering laws nationwide. They are deservedly (apparently, according to one very pissed off federal judge) paying a price for this, but what Epic is planning with the Epic Games Store seems like weak tea. There is nothing to stop Apple from pulling games out of the App Store and putting them in a competing “Apple Games Store,” with the same or better terms for successful developers with regard to handling in-app purchases. Apple has shown they have no qualms about cashing in on predatory games like Fortnite. Epic wants to compete with Apple. Fine! 12%! No problem! Let’s do 10%! Fun!

 

[Dreamweaver12]

This is enraging to me. What I think will happen is a lot of these developers will push all purchases to their sites, and stop accepting in-app purchases. Why should they get access to the market, the platform, and all of apple's services for free? Apple should counter this threat by charging for Apple Developer access based on company revenue.

And hopefully Mr. Sweeney doesnt have a terrible horseback riding accident.

 

[Stuwil]

That argument is the same thing. Who determines what “fat” is vs”good” vs “great”. Apple is an easy target.

Many companies have yearly release cycles and they make a fat profit. And many companies just make fat profits.

The big and real reason is many people would be pissed off and the industry would be destroyed.

you have just answered my point in that the console makers don’t produce a new generation of consoles every year unlike apple so that is why epic are not going after the console makers and challenging Apple for example because Apple’s business model is different than Sony & Microsoft & nintendo’s
So there is a big difference.

 

[I7guy]

you have just answered my point in that the console makers don’t produce a new generation of consoles every year unlike apple so that is why epic are not going after the console makers and challenging Apple for example because Apple’s business model is different than Sony & Microsoft & nintendo’s
So there is a big difference.

You've just confirmed the reason that console makers aren't under the same scrutiny is that the industry would be destroyed. Apple has a big fat, target on it's back.

Console makers can take 30% because they are poorer than Apple. A bunch of double standards.

 

[surferfb]

Console makers can take 30% because they are poorer than Apple. A bunch of double standards.

There is literally no difference between Apple and Sony when it comes to their digital stores. None. (Other than Epic would go out of business if they weren't on the PS store, so they aren't going to poke the bear to find out). If Apple broke even on hardware Epic would still raise a massive stink about 30% commissions.

 

[bcortens]

There is literally no difference between Apple and Sony when it comes to their digital stores. None. (Other than Epic would go out of business if they weren't on the PS store, so they aren't going to poke the bear to find out). If Apple broke even on hardware Epic would still raise a massive stink about 30% commissions.

Phones are more important than game consoles, that is a big difference.

In principle I agree that consoles with digital stores should not require devs to use their payment processing but it is completely expected that phones will be regulated when consoles get ignored.

 

[10anta]

Oh no

And therefore won’t bother making the same stuff/investments meaning there’s not the same premium products/they’re only available at a higher price

 

[10anta]

It's FUD. You have always used a "fragmented" market in your everyday life, even in your "real" life and I believe you aren't dead. So the same will be in the digital life. You buy from where you want...

Actually I tend to find retailers/products I like and stick to them.

Examples:
- Same supermarket every week
- Same manufacturer for my last two cars
- Same manufacturer for many of my household appliances
- Same parking spot every day I go in to work

 

[I7guy]

Phones are more important than game consoles, that is a big difference.

In principle I agree that consoles with digital stores should not require devs to use their payment processing but it is completely expected that phones will be regulated when consoles get ignored.

Phones are not regulated except for the health and safety aspects and there are more than a few regulations on the books dealing with anticompetitive and monopolistic behavior.

One provision in the epic vs Apple lawsuit has been set into motion as Apple lost on that count.

 

[bcortens]

Phones are not regulated except for the health and safety aspects. One provision in the epic vs Apple lawsuit has been set into motion as Apple lost on that count.

So there is anticompetitive regulation that applies to phones then? Yes?

 

[I7guy]

So there is anticompetitive regulation that applies to phones then? Yes?

Epic lost on those counts. Apple lost on the anti-steering provision. And that is still under appeal. We don’t know how it will turn out.

But for now Apple is complying with the court order.

 

[bcortens]

Epic lost on those counts. Apple lost on the anti-steering provision. And that is still under appeal. We don’t know how it will turn out.

But for now Apple is complying with the court order.

Anti-steering is not an anti-competitive regulation then? Are you not just trying to split hairs?

 

[Stuwil]

You've just confirmed the reason that console makers aren't under the same scrutiny is that the industry would be destroyed. Apple has a big fat, target on it's back.

Console makers can take 30% because they are poorer than Apple. A bunch of double standards.

Because for example if you bought a PS5 when it came out in 2020 you can’t buy a ps6 one year later or 5 years later
Where as if you bought an iPhone 12PM in 2020 you could purchase the 13PM the following year & so on
That’s the difference
So that is why epic & other games companies aren’t taken the games console makers to court.

 

[Stuwil]

There is literally no difference between Apple and Sony when it comes to their digital stores. None. (Other than Epic would go out of business if they weren't on the PS store, so they aren't going to poke the bear to find out). If Apple broke even on hardware Epic would still raise a massive stink about 30% commissions.

Well there is a difference one brings a new generation of there product every 7 years
And the other company brings a new generation out every year

So on the surface it’s not different when it comes to digital store
but it’s a very different business model behind it
context is everything in regards to this

 

[I7guy]

Because for example if you bought a PS5 when it came out in 2020 you can’t buy a ps6 one year later or 5 years later
Where as if you bought an iPhone 12PM in 2020 you could purchase the 13PM the following year & so on
That’s the difference
So that is why epic & other games companies aren’t taken the games console makers to court.

Console makers are even more locked down than the iphone and then there are those pesky commissions that some feel should be free on apples ios platform.

 

[I7guy]

Anti-steering is not an anti-competitive regulation then? Are you not just trying to split hairs?

The discussion is more nuanced than just splitting hairs. And it only was a California law.

 

[bcortens]

The discussion is more nuanced than just splitting hairs. And it only was a California law.

You seem to be trying to get out of saying that smartphones are regulated by trying to say that anti-competitive and anti-steering laws don't apply to smartphones or somehow aren't regulations, that is splitting hairs to no real end.


Its only a California law that is saying that the anti-steering laws apply, for now, but while I think Apple may get out of some of the 'permanent' aspects of the ruling I don't see them being at least temporarily restricted from any kind of charging for access due to the contempt of court aspects of the case.

 

[I7guy]

You seem to be trying to get out of saying that smartphones are regulated by trying to say that anti-competitive and anti-steering laws don't apply to smartphones or somehow aren't regulations, that is splitting hairs to no real end.

The real end is the app store is apples property and it's wrong for regulation to give away private property. And I hope this ends with Apple on the right of it.

Its only a California law that is saying that the anti-steering laws apply,

Yes, it was noted this is a California law.

for now, but while I think Apple may get out of some of the 'permanent' aspects of the ruling I don't see them being at least temporarily restricted from any kind of charging for access due to the contempt of court aspects of the case.

We'll have to see.

 

[bcortens]

The real end is the app store is apples property and it's wrong for regulation to give away private property. And I hope this ends with Apple on the right of it.

Apple was told to find a fair price for their IP and stop engaging in anti-steering practices, they were found to have done nothing of the sort. Now they are told they can't charge anything because they violated the first order. This is punitive for their behaviour. They aren't being forced to give away their private property (in your opinion) for no reason. They are being punished for non-compliance and continuing to engage in anti-competitive behaviour even after they were told to stop.

 

[Stuwil]

Console makers are even more locked down than the iphone and then there are those pesky commissions that some feel should be free on apples ios platform.

Again there is a big difference
if companies cared that much about Sony locking down the PS5 they would do something about it.
However they won’t because these companies recognize that Sony for example will bring out a new generation every 7 years or so that means that Sony’s income is coming from the digital store
Where as Apple on the other hand sell new generations every year so they make a profit regardless if the App Store takes 12% or 30% it makes no odds to Apple’s business model

 

[I7guy]

Again there is a big difference
if companies cared that much about Sony locking down the PS5 they would do something about it.
However they won’t because these companies recognize that Sony for example will bring out a new generation every 7 years or so that means that Sony’s income is coming from the digital store
Where as Apple on the other hand sell new generations every year so they make a profit regardless if the App Store takes 12% or 30% it makes no odds to Apple’s business model

The only difference to me is the immutable 30% that is taken. Otherwise console manufacturers have a locked down ecosystem.

 

[Stuwil]

The real end is the app store is apples property and it's wrong for regulation to give away private property. And I hope this ends with Apple on the right of it.

Yes, it was noted this is a California law.

We'll have to see.

How is it giving away Apple’s property when all this is doing is allowing the app owner to implement a charge at their end
That’s not stealing Apple’s property when companies like epic & Spotify are not on the App Store illegally

 

[Stuwil]

The only difference to me is the immutable 30% that is taken. Otherwise console manufacturers have a locked down ecosystem.

because it’s fundamentally a games console that you play for example PS5 games on
That is why it’s locked down & as a consequence of that that’s why no games maker is advocating for an option to make a separate purchase screen because they understand that Sony don’t make money off the hardware for the first 3 or so years
That’s the difference