They get 30% of the $12 million, plus interest. Not all $12 million
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 vs. Apple Judgment Allows App Store Developers to Link to Alternative Payment Methods
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wish I could say this was the dumbest comment in this thread but that wouldn't be close to true. It does however show a complete lack of understanding of what the issue is here. If you release an app that has a subscription or in app purchase beyond the initial purches on the Epic or Steam store you are under no obligation to provide future revenue to those companies. To your point, if apple wants to release an app on the PC and they don't like Epics price or policy then they can sell it on Steam, Microsoft Store, Origin Store etc. If they don't like those options then they're free to setup their own store to distribute apps. If Epic wants to do the same by selling an app on iPhones but doesn't like Apples policies they don't have the same options. There is no other store to sell on and they are not allowed to build their own store. Thats the real problem here. The fact they can sell on the Google store is NOT competition if their iphone customers don't also own an Android phone. Besides developers who owns both an Android phone and iphone? Do you consider being forced to carry two phones everywhere real market competition?
That is why I suspect Epic Games is going to appeal the ruling along with Apple.
Right. I'm just not seeing how this is a win for Epic - at all - considering their wild claims for taking this to court in the first place. None of them were found valid. And now, that's on record.
Both parties will appealed and we'll wind up back where we started - except Epic will not be on any Apple devices. If I were an Epic stockholder, or employee, I'd not be too happy with Sweeney. His martyr, Robin Hood angle, was total crap.
Last edited:
Microsoft is already allowing alternative payment options starting in Windows 11.
If Apple sets up road blocks they will be brought back into court for failure to comply with the courts order.We'll see how easy Apple makes that
If you download an app for free and then make an in-app purchase from the app downloaded to your device are you still in Apple’s store?
If you're pissed that you only get to keep 70% of your revenue from the App Store... you have a couple options:
- Leave the App Store completely and you'll get 0% of your revenue
- Build some other type of app, like a reader app, and have people pay you directly on your own website. Then you get 100% of your revenue. Be like Netflix.
Apple chooses to offer app distribution for free to categories where the availability of those apps adds value to Apple.
Sure, but they lost on that. They didn't prove Apple was a monopoly. At best their concession is that they get to link out of IAP. Which for most people that like easy. They may not do. I still think Apple will appeal that part of the decision. Because, well for it to be fair. All stores would have to work that way. Go to Target, and pick up some Windex. Then be presented with an advertisement that states "By this product online for less!". That ISH aint happening.
Is this a serious question? Apple would have to have a legit reason to block the app from the store. They can't simply block an app from the store just because.
Assuming if Epic Games does not appeal
I suspect Epic Games is going to appeal the judges decision you can not say Apple is wrong for forcing their payment system at the same time saying Apple is allowed to force their payment system and order Epic Games to pay their fees.
Isn't that similar to what they are doing already?
Apple gets a 30% cut from every purchase on the App Store. Or a 15% cut if the developer makes less than $1 million a year.
That sure sounds like a developer fee based on revenue...
And they can show a price difference. $4 through Apple and $3 through the link. For the people thinking this is no big deal, you're delusional.
All this ruling really does is this I'm thinking: Before the ruling, A store currently has printers and blank paper on a shelf it's selling. Near them are price tags. Now, after the ruling that store has to put a little sign next to the blank paper that reads, "This item is also available at this website or physical store..." Done.
What Apple should do is offer the equivalent of (digital) coupons like store do now, and price match guarantees, "If you see this at a cheaper price elsewhere, we'll match it!" (or better, "If you see this at another store for less, we'll beat it by 2%!")
What Apple should do is offer the equivalent of (digital) coupons like store do now, and price match guarantees, "If you see this at a cheaper price elsewhere, we'll match it!" (or better, "If you see this at another store for less, we'll beat it by 2%!")
If I understand correctly, Fortnight users could totally have bought all the gems/whatever they wanted, for in-game use, on Epic's site, ever since the game was first released. What Epic couldn't do was to advertise that fact inside of the app. This has been the same situation for Netflix - you could subscribe on the Netflix website and then use that subscription in the app. Same exact thing. Am I missing something, or is your statement about a sweetheart deal with Netflix for outside subscriptions misleading?
Winners aren’t generally expected to appeal.
Losers: Apple and Epic
Winners: Consumers and every other developer not named Epic
I tend to think most users will bypass the outside payment option, for a number of reasons, including the security in the Apple App Store model, and the simple convenience of using the built-in tools, along with the relative ease of managing a subscription right on the device, in the OS. This maybe more of a Pyrrhic victory for devs seeking to avoid paying apple a cut of subscription fees and the like. You won. Now, make it both cheaper for the user (because if you charge the same amount for whatever content, why would the consumer use your solution) AND at least as convenient.
I believe that was always the concern with 3rd-party IAP. When you're dealing with tens of thousands of developers and millions of apps, you can't do a case-by-case basis for anything, you have to come up with rules that prevent undesirable flows... if Apple charged a commission for sales of apps but then let the apps do their own IAP, pretty soon most every developer would switch to "free with (3rd-party) IAP to unlock", and the App Store would end up operating as a charity.
Apple should kick Epic out of the App Store permanently... and reduce App Store fees to 10% for all apps regardless of revenue.
That'll be extra salt in the wound for Epic...
🤣
Which I suspect Epic Games will appeal since you can not say Apple was wrong for forcing their payment system while also saying Apple is allowed to force their payment system and force Epic to pay their fees.
Yeah I was thinking this. The App Store will have ZERO revenue if all customers opt for alternative payment.