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: Timeline of Events Surrounding Fortnite's Removal From App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let's look at this in a a different way, say the App Store was Kroger's instead, and Epic was Nestle, and Nestle wanted to sell the Kit Kat in the Kroger store. Nestle would ship the Kit Kat to the Kroger store, at a wholesale or less price, Kroger would then provide an appropriate space in there stores to 'market/advertise' the Kit Kat, and would add their Gross Margin to it. What do you think Kroger's would say to Nestle if they wanted a bigger cut? Probably 'goodbye'.
How is this different to what Apple are doing? If Epic don't like it, they don't have to sell it there, and as they already market there product in at least 5 other distribution channels, what is the point of all this. It's also free!
How is this different to what Apple are doing? If Epic don't like it, they don't have to sell it there, and as they already market there product in at least 5 other distribution channels, what is the point of all this. It's also free!
Nestle is allowed to say on their packaging if you'd like something extra, go to our website and pay us for the extra?
Nestle is allowed to go down the street and sell their product at 10 other stores, to the same group of customers
A physical store has much higher operating expenses than a digital store that sells nothing but bits someone else produced?
How about this for an example, you walk into Barns & Noble and pickup MacLife.
You paid B&N for the product that they purchased, stocked the shelves with, and you used their cashiers/payment services to buy the magazine.
You go home, find you like the magazine and want to subscribe. You don't go to B&N and let them take money off the top, you go to MacLife and pay them for their subscription/content directly, and they make money for the content they produce.
Why is it so hard for people to understand that pretty much the only place in the world these strange "you owe me for everything your customer does" rules exists is in platform app stores? I have yet to see anyone list a good analog from the physical world.
No. If you broke a rule in an agreement that you reasonably believe is illegal (or in furtherance of illegal activity), the resulting action from the other party/parties in the agreement would provide standing for a lawsuit, at which point courts may determine whether that rule is in fact legal.
The sad part is back in the day Epic Megagames were actually a pretty cool company that put out pretty good games.
Thank you for clearing that up.
That's what's going to happen here. The same exact policy can't be legal according to Apple and Google but also illegal according to Epic. The courts will decide if it's actually illegal or not.
Thank you for clearing that up.
To be honest I really hope that Epic is successful with their legal challenge. You clearly have a small number of companies that have a monopoly over their platform stores, and for the most part all the stores arbitrarily have the same cut, regardless of their expenses. Those are monopolies and that could be considered price fixing. Spotify is a great example of a company getting hosed. The amount of money every musician in the world makes today from their music is directly effected by this 30% fee. That’s a huge cut for a lot of people that don’t make a lot of money. Same goes for all the little independent devs that make up the big long tail of content that makes the App stores so popular. It was one thing when these stores were just getting started, but now they wield a lot of power, and if you want to serve a mobile audience you have to do it through these stores.
I think both of these companies are garbage. However much I dislike Epic and refuse to participate in the game store, what Apple is getting away with, 30%, is absolutely ridiculous. they should lower that to more like 3%. I don’t believe for a minute that for every $100 of skins that sell in Fortnite, Apple has done $30 worth of curating and verifying.
Using the Verge article to highlight some observations
First being how big is the Apple App store
This part about developers are terrified of Apple I find interesting . . .look at the daring FireBall article linked.
Think about all the observation copied to here before thinking that Apple is doing nothing wrong. Perhaps there are a lot of developers without EPIC's billions that have been putting up with not having any say and barely surviving that huge cut that Apple demands as well as Google. If you say a lot of stores all do the same thing, that leads back to price fixing theory. I'd almost say this is a good time for Apple to hear from developers besides EPIC and consider if what they are currently doing is fair considering how much money the store makes for them now, never mind the small fry that use the store to give away applications to get a name for themselves.
Last edited:
Sorry nope, they can sell to those customers, those customers are people who want to play their game, they can do that, on another device.
As for operating costs, you have clearly no idea how much it costs to run a server farm, 24hrs a day, a team to do all the behind the scenes stuff. Oh, and 30% is chicken feed to the norm of 45%+ markups from companies.
Microsoft 365,, you can download their suite of apps, but you don't have to pay through the app. So to state they have a monopoly, is incorrect.
So please tell me, because no one has, why can't a company, who created a service, or a product/device choose what goes on it? There are female only gyms, there are male on clubs!
Aww, poor Tim Sweeny, can the petulant little billionaire not afford his fifth yacht?
This is infantile, pathetic, idiotic behaviour from Epic. They knew the rules when they dumped their game on the App Store and the Play Store. They agreed to those rules and they made millions. But then greed kicked in, and like Sweeny's childish behaviour in the PC space with his pointless war with Valve, he again threw his toys out of the pram.
Zero sympathy. The guy is a spoilt child who thinks he's exempt from the rules.
This is infantile, pathetic, idiotic behaviour from Epic. They knew the rules when they dumped their game on the App Store and the Play Store. They agreed to those rules and they made millions. But then greed kicked in, and like Sweeny's childish behaviour in the PC space with his pointless war with Valve, he again threw his toys out of the pram.
Zero sympathy. The guy is a spoilt child who thinks he's exempt from the rules.
Yep, they are all terrified here e.g. Downie when Apple “accidentally” flagged his App as malware and then after 1 day out of business they brought his App back to the AppStore. See his comment reply, you see he fears getting kicked out for talking about it.Using the Verge article to highlight some observations
First being how big is the Apple App store
This part about developers are terrified of Apple I find interesting . . .look at the daring FireBall article linked.
Think about all the observation copied to here before thinking that Apple is doing nothing wrong. Perhaps there are a lot of developers without EPIC's billions that have been putting up with not having any say and barely surviving that huge cut that Apple demands as well as Google. If you say a lot of stores all do the same thing, that leads back to price fixing theory. I'd almost say this is a good time for Apple to hear from developers besides EPIC and consider if what they are currently doing is fair considering how much money the store makes for them now, never mind the small fry that use the store to give away applications to get a name for themselves.
Apple has too much power, and is misusing it to terrify and insult devs. This has a touch of digital slavery to me... It’s a huge issue that they can simply deactivate Apps. They have killswitch for all devices, and have killswitch for all Apps, and probably can even delete files from all devices.
A Day Without Business – Charlie Monroe
blog.charliemonroe.net
Then the comments:
Ram
August 5, 2020 at 6:58 am
Sorry to hear this. Will Apple compensate you for your losses? Did you ask for compensation?
Reply
Charlie Monroe
: @Ram
August 5, 2020 at 7:00 am
I can’t comment either way at this point, sorry.
——-
The same is happening to cars(Tesla), if it continues like that, I’ll get me a oldtimer.
Last edited:
Look at it like this. Apple and google own land. Epic want to build a house on the land.
In Apple’s town you can only build a house on Apple’s land. Epic build a house on Apple’s land. They rent the house out to tenants. The tenants pay £1,000 a month in rent. This is paid directly to Apple as the land owners. Apple give Epic £700 and keep £300 for themselves as the landowners. This is an agreement Apple and Epic came to before Epic built the house on Apple’s land. Epic approach the tenants and suggest to them that they only have to pay £800 a month in rent, however to do this they should pay the rent directly to Epic, thereby bypassing Apple. In this scenarios Epic are using Apple’s land to build and rent a house but don’t want to pay for the use of that land.
Now let’s look at Google and Epic.
Google are the biggest landowners in their town. However there are other landowners and people can own their own land. Google own the best land in the town, which is right in the town centre. Epic own a much smaller piece of land which is on the outskirts of town. Epic decide to build a house but decide that they don’t want to share any of the rent money. They build a house on their own land. After 18 months they decide that they could get more tenants if they build their house on Google’s land as it’s bigger and in the town centre. They build a house on Google’s land and they know that google expect them to share 30% of the rent money and that the rent should be paid directly to google. They agree to this because they know they can make more money on Google’s land. However they secretly still don’t want to to pay any rent money to google but they want to use Google’s land. They build their house on Google’s land and then approach the tenants directly and offer them the same deal as they offered the tenants on Apple’s land. They ask for only £800 but ask the tenants to pay The rent directly to them, thereby cutting google out of the deal.
To put it simply epic want to use the App Store and playstore and not pay any money to Apple or google.
In Apple’s town you can only build a house on Apple’s land. Epic build a house on Apple’s land. They rent the house out to tenants. The tenants pay £1,000 a month in rent. This is paid directly to Apple as the land owners. Apple give Epic £700 and keep £300 for themselves as the landowners. This is an agreement Apple and Epic came to before Epic built the house on Apple’s land. Epic approach the tenants and suggest to them that they only have to pay £800 a month in rent, however to do this they should pay the rent directly to Epic, thereby bypassing Apple. In this scenarios Epic are using Apple’s land to build and rent a house but don’t want to pay for the use of that land.
Now let’s look at Google and Epic.
Google are the biggest landowners in their town. However there are other landowners and people can own their own land. Google own the best land in the town, which is right in the town centre. Epic own a much smaller piece of land which is on the outskirts of town. Epic decide to build a house but decide that they don’t want to share any of the rent money. They build a house on their own land. After 18 months they decide that they could get more tenants if they build their house on Google’s land as it’s bigger and in the town centre. They build a house on Google’s land and they know that google expect them to share 30% of the rent money and that the rent should be paid directly to google. They agree to this because they know they can make more money on Google’s land. However they secretly still don’t want to to pay any rent money to google but they want to use Google’s land. They build their house on Google’s land and then approach the tenants directly and offer them the same deal as they offered the tenants on Apple’s land. They ask for only £800 but ask the tenants to pay The rent directly to them, thereby cutting google out of the deal.
To put it simply epic want to use the App Store and playstore and not pay any money to Apple or google.
Last edited:
Wrong, even with your “own” land example, you have to follow national and even international rules, as soon you involve other citizens or countries into your business. In your “own” land you also have to get your building plans approved, and often you can’t even paint the walls of your house with the color you want, you have to choose a color that harmonize with the other buildings surrounding you.
Yes, I know in US/Texas they can shoot at people when strangers put a single toe on their ground, but you know what?, the rest of world does not work like this.
Last edited:
Fortnight may be good or a bad company but all the mentioned points are very very valid, 30% to Apple, 30% Google, 40% to themselves after doing all the development, service, support, SLAs! Really astonishing that all these years they were willingly surrendered themselves! I won’t blame Apple for others being meek!
Apple has faced increasing scrutiny over its App Store practices from both developers and regulators in recent months. One particularly vocal critic has been Fortnite creator Epic Games, which has repeatedly referred to the App Store as a monopoly.
In August 2020, Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store after Epic Games introduced a direct payment option in the app for its in-game currency V-Bucks, defying the App Store rules. In what appears to have been an orchestrated move, Epic Games promptly filed a lawsuit against Apple, accusing the company of anti-competitive actions.
Below, we've put together a timeline of the Epic Games vs. Apple saga.
June 16
June 23
- Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney tells The Washington Post that "the iOS App Store's monopoly protects only Apple profit, not device security."
- Sweeney quote tweets The Washington Post's story: "Here Apple speaks of a level playing field. To me, this means: All iOS developers are free to process payments directly, all users are free to install software from any source. In this endeavor, Epic won't seek nor accept a special deal just for ourselves."
July 24
- Sweeney tweets: "Opening iOS and Android up as truly open platforms with a genuinely level playing field between first party and third party apps and stores is the only way to ensure a competitive, healthy, and fair app economy."
July 28
- Sweeney tells CNBC that the App Store is an "absolute monopoly," arguing that "Apple has locked down and crippled the ecosystem by inventing an absolute monopoly on the distribution of software, on the monetization of software."
August 1
- Sweeney tweets: "It pains me to complain about Apple in this way. Apple is one of the greatest companies that has ever existed, perhaps the greatest. But they're fundamentally wrong in blocking competition and choice on devices they make, and that holds up entire fields of technological progress."
- Sweeney tweets: "This is a critical consideration in these 30% store fees. They come off the top, before funding any developer costs. As a result, Apple and Google make more profit from most developers' games than the developers themselves. That is terribly unfair and exploitative."
August 13
- Sweeney tweets: "Apple's intentional anti-competitive strategy has been running for much longer than most realize. Here they are in 2011 muscling Kindle purchases off of iPhone by demanding 30% of e-book revenue, 'which we acknowledge is prohibitive for many things.'"
August 14
- Epic Games introduces a direct payment option in the Fortnite app for iPhone and iPad, allowing players to purchase in-game V-Bucks at a 20 percent discount by sidestepping Apple's in-app purchase mechanism. This functionality violates Apple's App Store Review Guidelines, which indicate that apps offering in-game currency must use Apple's in-app purchase mechanism only.
- The direct payment option is also added to the Fortnite app on Android in violation of Google's Play Store rules.
- Epic Games describes Apple's and Google's 30 percent cut on in-app purchases as "exorbitant." Epic also notes that apps that offer real-life goods and services like Uber, DoorDash, and StubHub are not required to use Apple's in-app purchase mechanism, a rule that it believes should apply to all developers.
- Apple removes Fortnite from the App Store. In a statement shared with MacRumors, the company said that "Epic Games took the unfortunate step of violating the App Store guidelines that are applied equally to every developer and designed to keep the store safe for our users." The full statement is below.
- Epic Games files a lawsuit [PDF] against Apple in California, describing the company as a "monopoly power" and accusing it of "unfair and anti-competitive actions." The complaint alleges that "Apple has become what it once railed against: the behemoth seeking to control markets, block competition, and stifle innovation."
- Epic Games shares a video called "Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite," parodying Apple's iconic "1984" ad. Whereas Apple's ad portrayed IBM as the evil "Big Brother," Epic Games aims to show that Apple is now the dominant power. "Epic Games has defied the App Store Monopoly. In retaliation, Apple is blocking Fortnite from a billion devices. Join the fight to stop 2020 from becoming '1984.'"
- In a blog post, Epic Games encourages Fortnite players to fight against Apple's "app tax" by using the hashtag #FreeFortnite on social platforms.
- In an FAQ, Epic Games says that "all mobile developers and consumers have the right to choose alternate payment providers that charge less, as is the norm on all other general-purpose computing platforms, including Web, Windows, and Mac." Epic adds that "Apple even allows Amazon Prime Video to process payments directly as a special deal while holding other apps to a different standard."
- Spotify sides with Epic Games.
- Google removes Fortnite from the Play Store.
- Epic Games files a similar anti-competitive lawsuit against Google.
- Sweeney tweets: "Today, Apple said Epic is seeking a special deal, but that's not true. We're fighting for open platforms and policy changes equally benefiting all developers. And it'll be a hell of a fight!"
We will keep this timeline updated as further developments unfold in the Epic Games vs. Apple saga, so keep this page bookmarked to stay up to date.
- Sweeney tweets: "At the most basic level, we're fighting for the freedom of people who bought smartphones to install apps from sources of their choosing, the freedom for creators of apps to distribute them as they choose, and the freedom of both groups to do business directly."
Article Link: Epic Games vs. Apple: Timeline of Events Surrounding Fortnite's Removal From App Store
EXACTLY. The App Store is not a monopoly in any way, no matter how you slice it. Not happy with the App Store? Then dont put your game on it. Dont do business on the app store. Dont be a developer. If Epic Games is so great, then create your OWN platform and app store and make your own devices, like what apple does now (obviously that would be impossible for Epic Games) so just shut up and quit it.
Epic Games is just like that annoying, whining little kid who's jealous of someone else with a candy bar at the park.
If developers don't like Apple's 30% take, then simply don't put your game on the App Store. No one forced you to be a developer for Apple. I think Apple's 30% is very reasonable, considering that Apple puts a lot of effort into the App Store, and has to pay for its engineers too and to maintain the high quality app store.
As a company/developer you need to have control over how to target, market your products to your prospective customers. Apple promotion is generic and not the way you like them to promote it. Very sand boxed approach (they may call it neutral) and it is very restricted to App Store. For that no one will be cutting 30% of their revenue. Most & all of these distribution, hosting services for developers are highly generic and can be accomplished by the developers themselves at cheaper costs if they are provided with opportunities.
For small developers this may work, but for corporations with sizeable revenue, customer base, App Store tax provides not that much returns.
But I still blame developers for agreeing to all toxic clauses and whining later. They all must put up brave face by quitting App & Play Stores.
For App purchases alone Apple can charge 1-2% Max as a standard one and safeguarding customers card details. Beyond that App Store provides no utility for developers to cut 30%
If Apple and Google hadn’t spent billions of dollars developing the operating systems, SDKs, app stores and secure payment systems that developers have benefited from then we would have had a much smaller app economy.
We would most likely be almost 10 years behind current progress because when iOS and Android came out they were a decade ahead of everything that existed.
So all these companies complaining owe Apple and Google a massive thank you and there is much more innovation ahead because of these two companies (and Microsoft).
Tencent, Bytedance and the CCP need to stop playing games and stop using Epic as a proxy attack. They owe Apple a debt of gratitude and profit from Apple greatly.
They should be grateful that phones don’t look like this anymore and aren’t full of very easy to exploit security holes...
We would most likely be almost 10 years behind current progress because when iOS and Android came out they were a decade ahead of everything that existed.
So all these companies complaining owe Apple and Google a massive thank you and there is much more innovation ahead because of these two companies (and Microsoft).
Tencent, Bytedance and the CCP need to stop playing games and stop using Epic as a proxy attack. They owe Apple a debt of gratitude and profit from Apple greatly.
They should be grateful that phones don’t look like this anymore and aren’t full of very easy to exploit security holes...
If Apple don’t like national, international rules and laws, then simply don’t build or offer an AppStore in those countries. No one forces them to offer AppStores in those countries. Monopoly is monopoly, what you/we think is irrelevant, court around the world will decide. We’ll see, i hope Apple lose the battle badly, get few stereo slaps, and goes away head down with sore cheeks.
Just FYI, there were few other OSs in the market in the past 10 years like Blackberry, Windows Mobile, Sailfish, Symbion etc...only due to developers adoptions Android and iOS became the de facto OS in the market. If all major App Developers quit the platform it hurts the platform more than the developers.
That's true, Apple could not offer the App Store in those countries. But that fact is Apple complies with the local laws and regulations, like pulling VPN from the Chinese App Store etc. So the App Store is legal in every country it operations. They are not offering any illegal App Stores in any country, so your argument isnt sound (they may not like the rules and laws, but they complied, so they are doing nothing wrong).
Well, they complied up to a level, but Apple reached a critical mass and they have to check if Apple is acting anti-competitive, because then new rules and laws apply.
Apple or not, personally I’m happy that those regulations exists, good for customers, newer companies, and humanity in general. Personally I’m even for patent regulation, max. 5 years, like for medical stuff. I wouldn’t mind if they go after Sony, Nintendo & Co., too.
Epic is right, the app store fees are too high, moreover Apple's monopoly on the App store is not OK. Apple must allow 3rd party app stores at which point Epic and all the others will create their own app stores and do what they want, which they have every right to do.
This point, of no one complained when the app store was tiny, is exactly right - when it was tiny that was a whole different story. Everything changes, Apple is no longer on the brink of collapse, they are now the most valuable company on the planet. While that is well deserved, as I believe anybody would agree, it also changes the rules of the game.
Some things in particular - Google and Apple are now best frenemies, and control their stores with an iron fist, creating a duopoly. Google allows other app stores but I believe they are squeezing them out with algorithms rather than just saying no, like Apple does.
Apple saying it wants to "protect its users" .. YUCK!! Protect the users from what, from Apple losing some revenue?
Apple needs to change the rules in its own app store - perhaps taking a more reasonable 5%, not 30, and by allowing 3rd party app stores.
If you think they should retain full control then just stick up your right arm and say "Heil, Technocracy!"
Because really, Apple has already shown its true face by sticking contact tracing in its app - on the behest of Bill Gates controlling the WHO, apparently, because it wasn't for a virus with a 99.99999% survival rate.
And they have removed an app Hong Kong protestors were using to organize, on behest of the Chinese Government.
So you have to realize just this one thing: If Apple insists on a monopoly on the app store, what is really happening is that the Chinese Government, and all other sizeable governments in the world, have control of the app store.
Apple isn't going to ruin its business over some app some government doesn't like - they'll remove that app.
And Apple is going to add tracing apps if governments ask.
That means CHINA is now controlling your phone. Within limits, for the time being, but fast forward 10 years what do you think will happen? Ohh they'd never remove an app from the US store... oh except if they don't like it... because Apple can't say no. That's for sure.
Can Apple afford to offend China? China can actually, all by itself, send Apple into bankrupcy, just like the USA can.
The only way Apple can get around that is by - not being in control. Putting app stores under independent, decentralized control would be best. It's too important an issue to let an asian dictatorship decide what's on your phone.