Epic Games vs. Apple Judgment Allows App Store Developers to Link to Alternative Payment Methods

[PC_tech]

Did you read the ruling? The judge says they are not a monopoly. As other commenters have mentioned, prior to the App Store, software developers were lucky if they got to keep 10% of the revenue in some cases (usually was closer to 30%) – now thanks to Apple they get to keep 70% and access a ginormous customer base, and they feel entitled to MORE!!!

The judge did not say they weren’t a monopoly, she made no such comment 🙄

 

[subi257]

So, after reading the 185 page document, Sweeney and Epic are slimeballs They admitted that the Apple app store is what got them to where they are, with 64% of their fortnite sales on the iOS app store. They are charging 12% and running at a lose and losses expected to continue for a few more year....a loss leader to get people hooked and signed up.

 

[VoxzeyWoxzey]

Stock is crashing.

By crashing you mean sill up MoM, and that's before holiday season and the release of a new product? I'm not sure you understand the market.

 

[TheSapient]

Wait... we're getting 3rd-party app stores now?

So now I can go to some other marketplace and download apps to my phone?

How did I miss that?

Huh? The judge ruled that Apple has to allow apps to link out to 3rd party stores for in-app purchases. "In-app purchases from 3rd party stores" is different than being able to "go to some other marketplace and download apps to my phone". I said the former because I meant the former. If you are saying you disagree with your misreading of my post, well I'm with you on that.

 

[Homme]

Speaking of comprehension abilities...

"Apple won on 9 out of 10 counts " - the 9 out of 10 items were ridiculous side dishes from the show pony of a counter claim. the heart of the case, the only relevant and important issue, is the one issue that epic won on: forcing apple to allow 3rd party payment. and epic didn't just win for themselves, they literally just bludgeoned apple into allowing this for ALL developers all over the world.

saying this is a 1 out of 10 win is now YOU trying to mislead people. that 1 win was the ONLY thing that truly mattered. and they got it in a big way.

"and was ruled to not be a monopoly in this sub-category. " this very statement of yours, which is WHOLLY AND PROVABLY incorrect, is the heart of the problem with your response.

Evan Selleck of iDownloadblog.com has a great explanation of what ACTUALLY took place in that part of the ruling where he says: "Judge Gonzalez-Rogers says in the full ruling that the court cannot determine whether or not Apple is a monopoly in its own right, not under state or federal antitrust laws. However, the judge ruled that based on California’s competition laws, the company is engaging in anti-competitive behavior. Which led to this decision today."

your claim is that she determined they are not a monopoly. that is NOT what happened. she ruled that, at this time, she's NOT GOING to rule whether they are or not. but she did LEAN HEAVY in that direction by absolutely relying that they are clearly engaging in anti-competitive behavior (which is the heart of a monopoly's strategy). So in essence she's saying "i'm not going to call you a monopoly YET, but you CLEARLY have all the makings of one..."

"Apple is forced to do something in 90 days that they were already going to do for other "reader" categories. Apple will still likely appeal to push this off past 90 days." you're comparing apples and oranges (for lack of a better pun). and you're misleading anyone who reads your post. apple cherry picking certain people to receive more benefits than other companies is EXACTLY the problem. as apple stares us in the face and says "the store rules are evenly applied for everyone", they then turn around and apply them differently for different business models. Your point actually disproves your own argument.

hahaha epic failed to win this for themselves because even after 90 days apple will still permanently ban them from the App Store. Epic may have offered others this ability but they wanted a piece of the action too and failed because I know apple will permanently ban them. Epic won’t follow the rules

 

[Natrium]

The implications of this ruling go far beyond Epic. It essentially blows away the foundation of the App Store’s business model: a commission fee for every purchase. Big players, which contribute most to Apple’s profits, now have the option to bypass Apple’s fees entirely. The App Store profits could potentially dramatically decrease over time. Very bad for Apple.

 

[Brandon916]

So if you run a windows desktop, and want to buy something from amazon, should Microsoft get a cut of every purchase? After all, MS created Windows.

You're not allowed to use logic on an apple site. Lol..

 

[Brandon916]

With the $3.65M that Epic owes Apple, they just paid for Apple’s legal fees for the original lawsuit with enough left over to cover the appeal…

If Epic won, the cost of legal is now covered by Apple.

 

[Brandon916]

You're not getting it. Epic got EXACTLY what it wanted. It will now be able to completely bypass Apple's pay mechanism for everything. They have to pay the 30% while they were required to, now, they don't have to pay anything. They just link to their store.

Barring appeals, this going to cripple Apple's revenue from their app store.

Download a game for free. Here's a link to purchase the unlock code. 100% profits for developer. 0% profit for Apple.

Now, Apple is going to have to compete like any other stores. Get exclusive, and give out better deals. They can flip this around and offer deals to apps to be in the front page of the app store. Just have to work harder now.

 

[TheSapient]

So if you run a windows desktop, and want to buy something from amazon, should Microsoft get a cut of every purchase? After all, MS created Windows.

I bought an iPhone from Amazon using my Windows PC, for which I bought an app. Now MS, Amazon, and Apple all get a cut. I don't know what happens if I buy a PC through the Amazon app for my MicrosoftAmazonApple iPhone.

 

[jlc1978]

The judges ruling in my opinion is problematic due to the fact that the judge said Apple can not force their payment solution at the same time making Epic Games pay Apple's Payment fees for their forced payment solution that was ruled illegal by that judge.

The judge ruled on two issues:
1. Was Apple's actions illegal whne they prevented 3rd party payment sche notifications in app? The answer to this was yes.
2.Was Apple's contract terms of 30% cut legal and enforcable? The answer to this was also yes.

Bth decisions seem reasonable.

Epic agreed to terms that the judge declared was illegal and Apple could not force their payment solutions. The judge can not have it both ways either it was legal what Apple did which they are entitled to their money or it was illegal and they are not entitled to money from Epic Games.

Merely because one term in the contract is nullified does not mean the rest are, they're generally are separable.

Common sense has prevailed. It seams to be similar to the South Koreans conclusion.

Yes, Apple must allow outside payments but still contractually demand their cut. It will be interesting to see how Apple reacts in the end. They could demand a cut of all sales as a fee for being on the App Store and require developers to audit and remit the appropriate amount, or add other fees.

If I were Epic, I'd be worried the ultimate outcome is to force 3rd part access and not allow contractual terms demanding a cut of revenue,; which would have seriuos implications on how Epic makes money off of Fortnight.

PS: If this came from the EU would be equated by some as an attack to American companies as I’ve read in another thread. 😞

It's the west coast; Americans already consider them liberal commies like the EU, so yea.

It's They pay a yearly fee, right? It’s not free 🙄

$99 is a deal for what they get; Apple could simply charge more and separate out things currently incuded, resulting in higher prices for all developers. There is no way Apple will sit back and watch revenue dissappear without finding new ways to make up for teh loss.

I'm not sure this is the win for developers some places are claiming.

 

[I7guy]

Now, Apple is going to have to compete like any other stores. Get exclusive, and give out better deals. They can flip this around and offer deals to apps to be in the front page of the app store. Just have to work harder now.

Of course, if Apple appeals and the appeal is expected this may be stayed for a few years during the appeals process. So potentially they won't have to work harder for a while. /s

 

[Brandon916]

Maybe they are, I thought they were the same

look at the anti Apple media saying that this is a “major win” for Epic games. It’s not a major win for Epic, it’s one count ( a very important one) and something they wanted but they lost a lot more than they gained.

I love how the judge believes Apple isn’t a monopoly despite what Epic thinks. We can now use this as proof😁.

I mean even if Apple is forced to do this how can Epic games gain when they are still banned from the App Store

first anti Apple article

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/09/injunction-apple-must-open-up-app-store-payments-in-90-days/?utm_brand=arstechnica&utm_source=twitter&utm_social-type=owned&utm_medium=social

NO one is going to feel sad for any of these two companies. One is a trillion company, and the other is billion dollar company. Both are beyond rich. They'll both be fine.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Huh? The judge ruled that Apple has to allow apps to link out to 3rd party stores for in-app purchases. "In-app purchases from 3rd party stores" is different than being able to "go to some other marketplace and download apps to my phone". I said the former because I meant the former. If you are saying you disagree with your misreading of my post, well I'm with you on that.

Oops... when I hear "3rd party stores" I think of other marketplaces similar to the current App Store. My bad.

You know... a store is somewhere that sells a lot of items... sometimes from different manufacturers.

So if Overcast has a link to the Overcast website to buy a Premium subscription... I don't really think of that as a "store"

It's a webpage for a single app.

But yeah... I understand now. Sorry for my confusion earlier.

 

[Brandon916]

People here today think they can just setup their products inside a Wal-Mart and not expect to pay a fee of any kind while Wal-mart has massive overheard and billions of customers.

Developers are not different from anyone else. They don't get 100% profit while everyone else let's them live rent-free with a massive base of potential customers.

Then why can't Microsoft collect every transaction on Window?

 

[MacAddict1978]

People here today think they can just setup their products inside a Wal-Mart and not expect to pay a fee of any kind while Wal-mart has massive overheard and billions of customers.

Developers are not different from anyone else. They don't get 100% profit while everyone else let's them live rent-free with a massive base of potential customers.

This makes zero sense and you do not know how retail works.

1. Products brought in Wal-Mart/Target (ANYWHERE) are bought wholesale.... the store then marks it up to cover overhead and make a profit. Fruit of the Loom is not paying people to sell their underwear. Unilvier is not paying rent for Wal-Mart to stock Hellman's mayonnaise either.

Some companies will offer bonus money to have their product put on a higher shelf or be featured on an end-cap for a month, but that's not at all the same thing.

Apple is not stocking physical merchandise, paying shipping costs, paying staff to unload and stock the shelves with apps, writing of theft/damage/or returns that get no vendor credit, none of that. They charge $99 for each app published, plus the cost of a developer account annually and then take a 30% cut.

The average retail good sold in your example of Wal-Mart nets under 10% and requires a lot more effort and work.

Your comment about "rent free," I will cite that some stores have a "store within a store" concept. For example, Ralph Loren Polo at Macy's.... Macy's does not own or sell that that merchandise technically. Ralph Loren leases that floor space instead of having a Polo store in mall and contributes to a portion of the employee's pay.

 

[Brandon916]

Of course, if Apple appeals and the appeal is expected this may be stayed for a few years during the appeals process. So potentially they won't have to work harder for a while. /s

Not true. The court can fine Apple millions of dollars for everyday it doesn't make the update. Microsoft was fined one million a day back in the 90s for not complying. If the court fine Apple 10-50 million dollar a day, I'm sure they will comply.

 

[Brandon916]

There is no reason why Apple has to allow Epic back on the App Store in the long-term, so I wouldn't be so quick to judge this as any sort of win for Epic, specifically. For other large developers with trustworthy payment options? Sure.

They breached their contract (as confirmed by the judge with damages owed) and Apple is not being forced to re-allow them in this ruling. Of course, Apple says they are happy to allow Epic back onto the App Store as long as they comply with all rules, but it wouldn't surprise me if they changed their tune or continued to find things that Epic was not in compliance with.

But the new rules is what Epic wanted. They won't mind complying to the new rules w/ their own payment system. I think Apple might have to let them back in. If they don't, it might get more ugly for Apple. Epic might sue them about having a monopoly and how the court needs to force apple to allow sideload like Android. Now that would be an even bigger blow to apple.
Apple will now have app store from Amazon and Epic popping up on their phone. Not to mention, even a Samsung App store.

 

[I7guy]

Not true. The court can fine Apple millions of dollars for everyday it doesn't make the update. Microsoft was fined one million a day back in the 90s for not complying. If the court fine Apple 10-50 million dollar a day, I'm sure they will comply.

Or, the court can let the current system stand until the appeal verdict is rendered.

 

[Brandon916]

Apple deserved this. They didn’t need to be so greedy.

I hope they don’t appeal - if they do, they might completely lose any goodwill that they once had with their devs - and instead focus on making this a good experience for consumers.

An extremely bad call by Tim Cook who is really starting to look out of touch of late. I guess that’s what unparalleled success and riches can do to people.

That was a huge blow for them. Right before they had to meet in court, Apple changed their developer percentage. The court called them out saying Apple only did it to look good before this court date. Extremely bad look for Apple.

 

[subi257]

Epic lost nothing but gain everything. That's just your opinion.

They permanently lost the platform with 64% of their Fortnite user base....as per the 185 page court judgement document.

 

[Brandon916]

Or, the court can let the current system stand until the appeal verdict is rendered.

But you didn't say that. You said there is nothing the court can do which I simply gave an example of what the courts did to Microsoft in the 90s.

 

[Homme]

But the new rules is what Epic wanted. They won't mind complying to the new rules w/ their own payment system. I think Apple might have to let them back in. If they don't, it might get more ugly for Apple. Epic might sue them about having a monopoly and how the court needs to force apple to allow sideload like Android. Now that would be an even bigger blow to apple.
Apple will now have app store from Amazon and Epic popping up on their phone. Not to mention, even a Samsung App store.

the judge didn’t mention a limit on if when apple can bring epic back in the App Store. Heck it can be permanent

but how can that be bad for apple when epic ruined they’re own reputation

 

[I7guy]

But you didn't say that. You said there is nothing the court can do which I simply gave an example of what the courts did to Microsoft in the 90s.

Here's the exact quote....sorry if it wasn't worded clearly enough.

Of course, if Apple appeals and the appeal is expected this may be stayed for a few years during the appeals process. So potentially they won't have to work harder for a while.

 

[Homme]

Epic lost nothing but gain everything. That's just your opinion.

seriously dude you need to clearly look again

they owe apple back the amount of money due to they’re sneaky in app system, all of it

They failed to convince the judge to reinstate Fortnite back immediately on the App Store

even if the count which epic won against apple comes into effect, Epic will be banned from the App Store for a very long time so they don’t get the cash regarding that so another big loss for them

no unreal engine and access to Xcode for epic

no 3rd party app stores

they failed to prove apple is a monopoly

they failed to make iOS open

so yeah, keep on thinking they gained everything. Even Sweeney said they largely lost the case😂😂