I don't know about that, I really doubt any of the devs ever anticipated a lawsuit like this coming from Epic's willingness to break rules, so expecting them to accept a risk they couldn't have forseen is a little much
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 'Spent Months' Preparing Lawsuit Against Apple, Codenamed 'Project Liberty'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The judge hasn't "agreed". The judge said not to do anything until after the decision of the case. It's called a "Temporary Restraining Order/ preliminary injunction" for a reason. If Apple wins their case that this is a simple contract dispute, Apple can and will terminate the Unreal Account because it was in the terms and conditions that Epic signed up to.
Last edited:
True. I respect that perspective. However, if I get married and they commit tax fraud regarding personal finances I am still going to be accountable for those funds even if I never expected they would misrepresent our finances to the IRS. Different contracts, but still legal agreements.
I look forward to the day when I can find porn safely and add-free on an app rather than through the browser riddled with scams, spams and viruses. For now, Twitter seems to be serving this purpose unchecked as it is. Porn is normal, nearly everybody has it or uses it, and we shouldn't be ashamed. No shame!
Well, you’re not thinking far enough from now, but yeah most people can’t understand, or are unable to see the coming consequences(80/20 rule applies). It’s also like when we try to explain kids that they shall learn, and be good at school, do their homework, etc. to benefit later, it’s simply currently non-tangible.
Luckily I’m already over the 40s, and hopefully this all won’t affect me that severe.
Last edited:
I don't play fortnite ,but am generally a pretty big fan of how epic is turning the industry on it's head. They give developers a much bigger cut on their platform than steam does and I think other stores should follow suite. This includes apple and google. Developing for ios is like pulling teeth. Charging 30% after putting developers through that is like a kick in the teeth.
That was part of the issue. Services like Uber and Netflix have a special deal with apple and google. Epic is arguing they and other developers should also be able to take payment outside of the app store. Apple states that if you host your app on their store you no longer can take payment or subscription fees for that app outside the store.
Which Apps bypass Apple Tax?
The Apple Tax doesn’t apply to everyone and the exceptions may not be who you expect
If that is what you want, there is a platform that supports that. Please switch rather than ruining the platform that the rest of us prefer.
What makes it so hard for you to understand that consumers have a choice between a more open platform and what Apple offers and that they picked what they wanted? Forcing your choice on the rest of us is not “consumer-first”.
My two boys have moved on. Not missed it and hardly talk about it anymore. Kids with the attention span of a Knat. Plus as an adult I don't let them buy **** inside an app at the price of a small car. There's a word in this house and its used "NO" you can't have it.
I think many developers today have no idea what it was like before app stores and how much better it is today for them.
Developer's tools used to be real expensive in many cases; today they are free or nearly free.
You had to invest money up front in packaging, printing manuals, advertising, finding a distributor willing to carry your product, etc; all of which could represent a lot of money upfront before your first sale; today you can develop the app and put it on the app store and not have to front the costs of producing inventory.
Piracy was rampant; despite attempts to institute DRM bit copiers allowed people to copy to their heart's content; while piracy is still a problem iOS has made it harder to do on the iPhone than on a PC.
Finally, on top of all of that; you were lucky to get 30% of the sale price after everyone took their cut; now you get 70%.
Apple could lower that cut but they could simply charge for things that are currently included and raise the price on tools used for commercial development to compensate. In the end, the very person at risk of being hurt is the small developer who can't afford to front run costs hoping their app will take off; or not get pirated from some 3rd party app store if apps can be side loaded easily.
Yes, the whole in-game digital currency to cash business is, to say the least, hazardous. For the same reason Apple had to partner with Goldman Sacks for the Apple Card and why Venmo (owned by PayPal) had to partner with an existing bank to put out the Venmo Card, Epic would need to partner with a chartered bank in each country it would want to allow such services in. Then you’ve got anti-money-laundering and know your customer regulations and requirements they’d need to satisfy. (And in game currency is already often used by criminals as a front for money laundering, see buying and selling gold in WoW.) And, if you can earn Vbucks in game, then they’d probably run afoul of online gambling laws, especially given their teenage base. I don’t doubt that they’d enjoy being able to sell physical goods in game (for a cut, of course), but it would open a huge legal can of worms that would expose them to legal liability that could possibly bring down the whole company.
Yep, all while crouched in the language of concern for others. There’s really no shame in arguing for your interests, but there is shame in arguing for your interests while claiming to be arguing for other people’s interests instead (especially if what you’re arguing for isn’t actually in their interests).
For me it sounds a lot like the idea to support the Talibans to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan: it looked simple, logical and the right thing to do to help them fight for freedom at that time; but the final result many years later is that the world became a worse place after they won. If Sweeney is keen on "history lessons" maybe he should think more about that…
Let me be categorical about this. Uber does not have a special deal with Apple. Apple has NEVER charged a fee for physical purchases within an app. That’s part of the reason why Amazon has a storefront app on iOS but the Kindle app doesn’t sell ebooks. To claim otherwise is either a woefully terrible misunderstanding of the actual rules or a deliberate lie.That was part of the issue. Services like Uber and Netflix have a special deal with apple and google. Epic is arguing they and other developers should also be able to take payment outside of the app store. Apple states that if you host your app on their store you no longer can take payment or subscription fees for that app outside the store.
Which Apps bypass Apple Tax?
The Apple Tax doesn’t apply to everyone and the exceptions may not be who you expectmedium.com
Netflix does not have a “special deal” with Apple, either. So called “reader“ apps have been a thing for some time, Spotify, certain subscription based enterprise software applications, other subscription based media services (such as cable apps or HBO GO) have always been free to offer their apps via an external subscription, they just can’t advertise their subscriptions/one-time-purchases or solicit subscription sign ups within the application. Reader apps are not limited to ”big name” firms either.
What’s generally not allowed, though, is selling local executable code through means other than the App Store (Facebook wanted to be able to sell Messenger games on iOS through the Messenger app without paying the Apple cut, which goes against Apple’s policies on both counts). Though Apple also does seem to have an issue with buying games for other devices (like Stadia or Steam) through an App Store app (and that seems to be a general thing, even ignoring the idea of an App Store cut).
Epic can hide behind a “gamer first” or “fight for the small developers” facade all the want, but I think the vast majority of us really know what this is about.
This is nothing more than 2 insanely wealthy companies bickering about who gets to keep even more money from us. You could make valid arguments for both sides, but at the end of the day it’s the companies and their executives that will win.
Also funny that Epic is arguing for a “free and open market” when I recall them signing dozens of exclusivity contracts with developers to ensure that they didn’t put their games on other storefronts...
This is nothing more than 2 insanely wealthy companies bickering about who gets to keep even more money from us. You could make valid arguments for both sides, but at the end of the day it’s the companies and their executives that will win.
Also funny that Epic is arguing for a “free and open market” when I recall them signing dozens of exclusivity contracts with developers to ensure that they didn’t put their games on other storefronts...
Epic is not on anyone's side other than their own.
If you think this is about helping small developers, and not about helping Epic and Epic alone, then the politest thing that I can say is that you are misguided.
When can we expect legislators to look at Epic (and others to be fair) predatory business model? The whole microtransaction business model, especially with so called "free to play" games is designed to keep consumers paying indefinitely for a product which historically they would have payed for once and then owned the license to use it as long as they chose. And, the business model disproportionately preys on children and adolescents. So if we really want to look at what big tech is doing that is anti-consumer, lets look at ALL of it.
If you think this is about helping small developers, and not about helping Epic and Epic alone, then the politest thing that I can say is that you are misguided.
When can we expect legislators to look at Epic (and others to be fair) predatory business model? The whole microtransaction business model, especially with so called "free to play" games is designed to keep consumers paying indefinitely for a product which historically they would have payed for once and then owned the license to use it as long as they chose. And, the business model disproportionately preys on children and adolescents. So if we really want to look at what big tech is doing that is anti-consumer, lets look at ALL of it.
oh is there??? please tell me more about this platform. what’s it called?? i love choices.
it’s a sad state of affairs when people are terrified of having the slightest bit of control over what goes on their phone.
lmao dude nobody’s forcing you to do anything, other than apple forcing you to not have a choice of what to do with your device.
We aren't terrified. We just like the overall package that Apple provides.
Given there are other valid options (Android smart phones, at least) that provide a different experience, those of us who like the Apple ecosystem aren't interested in seeing it messed up because someone wants to mess it up for us instead of using the other alternatives that are available.
what will be “messed up” about your phone if apple gives people the choice to get apps from outside the app store?
The security model, for one thing, and the quality of apps if people choose to pirate on iOS as they do on Android.
Amazon does though.
Amazon Prime Video now allows in-app rentals and purchases on the iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV
Amazon doesn’t appear to be raising prices either.
www.theverge.com