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

[GizmoDVD]

guess you just answered my question. thanks.

To me, i don't see this materially affecting apples profits or earnings.

Very little, aside from reworking some of the IOS code. Epic really wanted:

Spider-Man Skin
Apple Pay $4.99
Epic Pay $3.99

and CLICK, I'll take the Epic Pay.

This gives the consumer MANY hoops to jump through for a purchase, which was once decided by a tap and a few seconds now taking minutes of entering in credit card info. What parent is going to do that for a screaming kid?

Hahahah, Epic lost so damn hard. Tim Sweeny is probably crying ion a corner. Not only does he have to pay Apple, but he;'s lost a year+ of revenue from IOS and likely millions of players never coming back

 

[JPack]

Common sense decision by judge.

But there are far too many Stockholm syndrome posters here trying to defend Apple.

 

[GizmoDVD]

Common sense decision by judge.

She was a great judge who actually knew her ****. I listed/read a lot of it.

 

[5232152]

and how will it talk back to Apple to get that game or IAP working? Will it be a code they enter into the App?

Don't need to. Deep link to the app, call backend api to check for access and then open up the pearly gates to your paid content.

 

[playtech1]

As I've said a few times on this forum, Apple missed a trick by not unilaterally cutting the % fee they took to a level that made a challenge pointless - now in their biggest market they have lost in a fairly important way and will have to restructure how they get (probably less) revenue from the App Store.

And worse still it won't have made the antitrust cases in other jurisdictions go away, so it's not the end of this story.

 

[Khalmoon]

Apple should put a game in the epic game store, and then demand that Apple pay be an option for payment on that game.

 

[NightFox]

So the judgement is also that Epic now have to pay damages to Apple retrospectively for something that the same judge has deemed Apple are no longer allowed to do?

 

[Cosmosent]

Just proposed a middle-ground solution to Apple & Sequoia Cap.

We'll see what happens.

 

[Villarrealadrian]

Another win for epic

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Wow. I can’t believe this. I was not expecting this at all.

What if Apple does not allow EPIC games into the App store?

 

[Khalmoon]

Epic Game's Next Target is going to be Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo to force alternative payment options as well.

 

[GizmoDVD]

Don't need to. Deep link to the app, call backend api to check for access and then open up the pearly gates to your paid content.

We'll see how easy Apple makes that

 

[citysnaps]

Huge L for Apple. If this stands after appeal, you can take tens of billions of future revenue off the table.

No worries on lost revenue. Apple will make up for that loss by increasing prices in other areas (products, services, software).

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

It’s not looking good for Apple. I wonder if Epic games will make a come back to the App store now.

 

[GizmoDVD]

Another win for epic

You must not be able to read the outcome...this is not what Epic wanted. They can't add their ENITRE STORE to the iOS. THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED.

 

[cardfan]

Stock is crashing.

That was expected though.

 

[Morichan]

Yay, finally!

 

[GizmoDVD]

So the judgement is also that Epic now have to pay damages to Apple retrospectively for something that the same judge has deemed Apple are no longer allowed to do?

Yes, they breached the original contract. That's how the law works.

 

[NightFox]

Stock is crashing.

Buy!

 

[BC2009]

This is EXACTLY how I would have ruled on this if I was the judge. Everything Apple did seemed fine to me with the exception of the clause in the developer guidelines that said that an app cannot direct a user to their website for an alternate payment option, possibly at a discount.

That was the one clause that was NOT justified by anything that game consoles have done in the past NOR was it there to help the end-user in any way (it actually made some reader apps really difficult to use). That rule also did nothing to help small developers enter the market and compete — that clause was solely for Apple to maintain control and remain the middle-man in all transactions.

I think I said this in a past comment, so I have to look it up now.

UPDATE: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed.2296687/page-6?post=29904216#post-29904216

 

[silver25u]

Apple will immediately appeal this, and they should.

It should not be that if you create something, another party profits off of it, and then suddenly wants to change the rules, that they’re able to.

This argument is premised on the belief that app developers don't create value for Apple/AppStore/iPhone and that there are zero constraints on Apple in how it conducts business.

 

[bgraham]

Apple will immediately appeal this, and they should.

It should not be that if you create something, another party profits off of it, and then suddenly wants to change the rules, that they’re able to.

Are you talking about Apple profiting off Epic's creation, I assume?

 

[ghostface147]

Meh. This is pretty much what was expected in my eyes.

 

[Think|Different]

Epic tarnished their ‘rep’ in my eyes with how they went about this whole thing, especially when their leadership weighed in as if it was personal.

Both companies will be fine, money-wise, but Epic has lost something in this fight that no judge can award.

 

[mrat93]

Apple should put a game in the epic game store, and then demand that Apple pay be an option for payment on that game.

they literally could already do that if they wanted lol.