Epic vs. Apple Takes a Twist As 35 US States and Department of Justice Weigh in to Back 'Fortnite' Maker

[Ethosik]

Point being, it’s not a choice that should have to be made in either scenario. Companies shouldn’t be able to force consumers into making such decisions because of their power and control of a market.

Choice happens every day. Do you think I have a choice between Xbox and Playstation if I want to play God of War Ragnarok? Or if I can get Disney+ instead of Netflix if I want to watch Sranger Things? Not really sure what the argument here is. You have a choice....an upfront choice that is not even hidden when you get an iPhone vs any Android phone.

And sorry, if you find Apple locking you in to an environment is WORSE than having to put your house up for sale, pack up your belongings, buy another house, and move just to get something other than Spectrum to be EASIER or even comparable?! That is a you problem, not an Apple problem.

 

[vipergts2207]

Choice happens every day. Do you think I have a choice between Xbox and Playstation if I want to play God of War Ragnarok? Or if I can get Disney+ instead of Netflix if I want to watch Sranger Things? Not really sure what the argument here is. You have a choice....an upfront choice that is not even hidden when you get an iPhone vs any Android phone.

And sorry, if you find Apple locking you in to an environment is WORSE than having to put your house up for sale, pack up your belongings, buy another house, and move just to get something other than Spectrum to be EASIER or even comparable?! That is a you problem, not an Apple problem.

“That’s a you problem, not a Spectrum problem.”

 

[Maximara]

No my point, perhaps unclear, is that Epic by themselves weren’t in a great position to argue the broader point of Apple’s power over general smartphone app distribution. However, had the case been brought by several different companies with disparate types of software, such as games, productivity, and social media they could more effectively make a case against Apple. Epic may have tried to argue the broader case, but since they only make games, it would probably be hard for a judge not to narrow the market to one of games since that’s all Epic makes.

Doesn't matter as Epic did try to argue the broader case when they could have argued the more narrow one and Epic lost that argument.

"The parties agree that the Court must determine which products or services are in “the area of effective competition” to define the product market. Amex, 138 S. Ct. at 2285; Thurman Indus., 875 F.2d at 1374 (“For antitrust purposes, defining the product market involves identification of the field of competition: the group or groups of sellers or producers who have actual or potential ability to deprive each other of significant levels of business.” (citation omitted)). The relevant product market “must encompass the product at issue as well as all economic substitutes for the product.” Newcal, 513 F.3d at 1045. “Economic substitutes have a ‘reasonable interchangeability of use’ or sufficient ‘cross-elasticity of demand’ with the relevant product.” Hicks, 897 F.3d at 1120 (quoting Brown Shoe v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325 (1962)); DuPont, 351 U.S. at 404."

"Plaintiff’s reliance on Dr. Evans’ testimony to the contrary does not persuade. First, Dr. Evans’ testimony was internally inconsistent. (...) The semantic difference does not warrant departure from Supreme Court precedent (...) Second, distribution services may improperly imply that only developers consume Apple’s products. The evidence is to the contrary. By contrast, all of the experts agree that both users and developers consume App Store transactions."

By sending briefs on regarding Apple opening their store to all apps Ads effectively brought that into the case just as Epic managed to get California's vague law into a case where it may have had no relevance and may cause the Ninth Circuit to rule on that with much the same result - egg on their face. It is that Trump really won the 2020 election nonsense in a new suit.

 

[Ethosik]

“That’s a you problem, not a Spectrum problem.”

Again you are massively missing the point. We should have government step in to have COMPETITION in the ISP space, not waste their time with iOS App Stores.

It is not a me problem, I HAVE NO DAMN CHOICE!!!!! Whereas I have a choice in Android vs iOS.

 

[Maximara]

“That’s a you problem, not a Spectrum problem.”

Wrong because there is not other viable option in that area so it is not a "you" problem.

 

[vipergts2207]

Doesn't matter as Epic did try to argue the broader case when they could have argued the more narrow one and Epic lost that argument.

"The parties agree that the Court must determine which products or services are in “the area of effective competition” to define the product market. Amex, 138 S. Ct. at 2285; Thurman Indus., 875 F.2d at 1374 (“For antitrust purposes, defining the product market involves identification of the field of competition: the group or groups of sellers or producers who have actual or potential ability to deprive each other of significant levels of business.” (citation omitted)). The relevant product market “must encompass the product at issue as well as all economic substitutes for the product.” Newcal, 513 F.3d at 1045. “Economic substitutes have a ‘reasonable interchangeability of use’ or sufficient ‘cross-elasticity of demand’ with the relevant product.” Hicks, 897 F.3d at 1120 (quoting Brown Shoe v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325 (1962)); DuPont, 351 U.S. at 404."

"Plaintiff’s reliance on Dr. Evans’ testimony to the contrary does not persuade. First, Dr. Evans’ testimony was internally inconsistent. (...) The semantic difference does not warrant departure from Supreme Court precedent (...) Second, distribution services may improperly imply that only developers consume Apple’s products. The evidence is to the contrary. By contrast, all of the experts agree that both users and developers consume App Store transactions."

By sending briefs on regarding Apple opening their store to all apps Ads effectively brought that into the case just as Epic managed to get California's vague law into a case where it may have had no relevance and may cause the Ninth Circuit to rule on that.

Which part of that refutes the fact that the judge’s monopoly statement pertained to the market as she defined it?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Some of Apple’s behavior makes me wonder if their long term plans move the business model to SAAS as the predominate money maker instead of hardware.

And that will be the day I move on (if I haven’t already by then)

 

[vipergts2207]

Again you are massively missing the point. We should have government step in to have COMPETITION in the ISP space, not waste their time with iOS App Stores.

It is not a me problem, I HAVE NO DAMN CHOICE!!!!! Whereas I have a choice in Android vs iOS.

Do you really have no choice? No AT&T or Verizon FIOS? No home internet through LTE?

 

[Ethosik]

Do you really have no choice? No AT&T or Verizon FIOS? No home internet through LTE?

Nope. I just have Spectrum as the choice. I checked because I need to have them fix issues once a month and am tired of it.

 

[Abazigal]

How exactly is Apple a monopoly? Show us the legal backing to that. The law seems to disagree with you.

This is the problem with this whole debate. It's being run by people who don't have a clue. People here don't know what a monopoly actually is...because if the DID...they'd see pretty CLEARLY that Apple isn't one. Our dinosaurs in government don't understand technology enough to understand the consequences of what they're pushing.

Apple has a monopoly on iOS devices, because they are the only company who can legally manufacture and sell them.

However, in the US, antitrust law is predicated on proving harm to consumers (in contrast to EU law, which focuses on harm to businesses). That’s likely why the epic lawsuit failed, because the App Store rules are designed to benefit consumers at the end of the day.

It’s not enough to just be a monopoly.

 

[Abazigal]

No Apple is not a monopoly per Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 812 Filed 09/10/21. Deal with it.

Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on the distribution of mobile games. Which is why Epic ultimately lost - because they choose such a narrow definition of the term which was ultimately not to their benefit.

 

[Maximara]

One problem, if I develop an iOS app it can’t ever work on an android phone.

That is due to difference in binaries. Try to run a windows program on a Mac without either WINE or the Windows OS and see how well that works. Heck try to run unaltered Linux binary on a Mac and see how well that works.

Heck, Apple itself has said the only thing keeping Windows from officially running on the M1 Macs is Microsoft's license - which is supported by people getting Windows for ARM running via virtualization and getting performance nearly double what the same OS does natively on Miscrosoft's own hardware.

I must a new program specifically for it to work.

Or plan ahead and make sure you use a tool that is crossplaform to begin with. Like Swift which runs on iOS, iPadOS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS, and, thanks to github, Android.

Some of these comments remind me of Bizzaro Cyborg from the old Superfriends cartoon - "I learn about technology. Watch me interface with computer." smashes head into monitor.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Apple has a monopoly on iOS devices, because they are the only company who can legally manufacture and sell them.

That’s Epic’s argument, and it’s absurd. Epic has a monopoly over Fortnite and Fortnite skins. Epic should be forced to let third-parties sell their own skins and items in Fortnite. It’s so stupid. In the smartphone market, Apple is definitely not a monopoly. They are one of many manufacturers. Anyone who cares about sideloading can buy an Android- although Android users mainly stick to the Play Store anyways.

 

[Maximara]

Apple has a monopoly on iOS devices, because they are the only company who can legally manufacture and sell them.

That is like saying Nintendo has a monopoly on Nintendo devices, because they are the only company who can legally manufacture and sell them.

 

[I7guy]

Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on the distribution of mobile games. Which is why Epic ultimately lost - because they choose such a narrow definition of the term which was ultimately not to their benefit.

If I recall epic tried a broader definition and the judge narrowed the market definition.

 

[vipergts2207]

Nope. I just have Spectrum as the choice. I checked because I need to have them fix issues once a month and am tired of it.

Sounds like you need to move somewhere where capitalism is as “thriving” in ISPs as it is in the smartphone platform market. If ISP competition is important to you, you should have done your research before buying a house there, rather than rely on government to force regulations on businesses.

 

[AppliedMicro]

The ONLY reason I spend $1,000+ on an iPhone vs a much better and cheaper Android phone is due to the completely locked down environment. That is MY CHOICE. And MY SOLE reason for iOS.

Well you're a very special person then.

Most people chose their device for ease of use, familiarity with the system, familial support with the system, network effects such as friends and family using iMessage, previous investments in apps, etc.

Why are you so sick of iOS App Store only? You can just go and buy Android instead, can't you?
Leave iOS alone. Just like you want me to leave Spectrum monopoly alone?! What is going on here?!

I can buy Android. I don't want to. I don't like it.
I want iOS as it is - but... yes, give me that toggle!
Or at least extend the signing period for the apps sideloading that I can already sideload today.

If I'm saying I'm sick of that restriction and the Apple tax, that could be the personal tantrum I'm throwing. And it's not only mine.

"Difficult to switch"

Yeah like selling a $250,000+ house and moving just to change ISP?! How is that comparable?! I can move to Android today....I can't do that with my house.

See... I also find it difficult to switch to Android, considering how entrenched I'm into Apple's system.

But... I'm just a consumer that could, admittedly, do so rather easily.
Not everyone can do that though.

And sorry, if you find Apple locking you in to an environment is WORSE than having to put your house up for sale, pack up your belongings, buy another house, and move just to get something other than Spectrum to be EASIER or even comparable?! That is a you problem, not an Apple problem.

It may be a "me" problem for me as a consumer.
It is an Apple problem for developers of mobile apps.

Again you are massively missing the point. We should have government step in to have COMPETITION in the ISP space, not waste their time with iOS App Stores.

It is not a me problem, I HAVE NO DAMN CHOICE!!!!! Whereas I have a choice in Android vs iOS.

Developers HAVE NO DAMN CHOICE EITHER!!!!!

They can or can't just make online dating app about as easily same as you can move somewhere with better internet access. Having Android-only apps is not a viable option in the marketplace for many developers.

Wrong because there is not other viable option in that area so it is not a "you" problem.

? There's not other viable option (alternative App Store) "in the area" of iOS devices either.

So I welcome at least some government and legal action to broaden choice and promote competition "in that area".

 

[Maximara]

Which part of that refutes the fact that the judge’s monopoly statement pertained to the market as she defined it?

As the judge pointed out it was Epic's responsibility to shows the product market was one for “Smartphone Operating Systems.” which as I have pointed out ignores the fact iOS runs on iPad a tablet. Epic was already artificially limiting the scope of the iOS App store because they knew that they would have no chance in room 7734 of winning that argument if tablets were involved.

 

[I7guy]

[…] you should have done your research before buying a house there, rather than rely on government to force regulations on businesses.

This sounds like what some are saying here.

 

[Ethosik]

Sounds like you need to move somewhere where capitalism is as “thriving” in ISPs as it is in the smartphone platform market. If ISP competition is important to you, you should have done your research before buying a house there, rather than rely on government to force regulations on businesses.

If side-loading is important to you, you should have done your research about iOS being locked down before purchasing your iPhone, rather than rely on government to force regulations on businesses.

I really don't see how you are YAY BREAK UP APP STORE!!!!! and in the same topic say YOU NEED TO MOVE!

Again, I will say the same thing - Get Android. Leave iOS alone and just buy an Android. Believe me you will have a easier time switching than I will selling a house.

 

[Ethosik]

Developers HAVE NO DAMN CHOICE EITHER!!!!!

Yes they DO. I am a developer, Apple is not forcing me to develop for iOS. I have a choice where I target.

 

[Maximara]

Eschewing iOS is not a viable option for many app developers either.

An intelligent developer would program for both iOS and Android just like really popular games are coded natively for Windows and MacOS. End of problem. By contrast a lazy or time pressed developer will just shove their code into WINE via Crossover and pray to the programing deities that nothing breaks due to a. future OS patch. /s

Heck on steam there are plenty of programs that run on Windows and Linux but not on MacOS even though MacOS with its 15.33% looks at Linux's 2.09% and laughs. These developers will leave a market over 7 times greater than one they will put time into and leave that money on the table?! Even though Darwin (the under the hood guts of the MacOS) is open-source. Brilliant /s.

 

[vipergts2207]

As the judge pointed out it was Epic's responsibility to shows the product market was one for “Smartphone Operating Systems.” which as I have pointed out ignores the fact iOS runs on iPad a tablet. Epic was already artificially limiting the scope of the iOS App store because they knew that they would have no chance in room 7734 of winning that argument if tablets were involved.

Yes and Epic failed to prove to the judge that the relevant market to the case was the one Epic had stated. So the judge deemed the relevant market digital mobile gaming. Her analysis from there used that market as the frame of reference. Read it in her words.

“Having defined the relevant market as digital mobile gaming transactions, the Court next evaluated Apple’s conduct in that market. Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal. The final trial record did not include evidence of other critical factors, such as barriers to entry and conduct decreasing output or decreasing innovation in the relevant market. The Court does not find that it is impossible; only that Epic Games failed in its burden to demonstrate Apple is an illegal monopolist.”

It doesn’t get anymore clear than that. There’s her monopoly statement in exact context. The entire paragraph is premised on the very first sentence in that paragraph. “Having defined the relevant market as digital mobile gaming transactions.” You don’t get to apply the monopoly statement to a market the judge said was not relevant to this case.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Yes they DO. I am a developer, Apple is not forcing me to develop for iOS. I have a choice where I target.

Some people can easily and happily with a Spectrum internet connection that gives out once a month.
Just as some developers can happily live exclusively off of Apple's ecosystem.

Others... not so much. Some apps are severely disadvantaged in the market or hardly viable when they're only available on one platform.

 

[vipergts2207]

This sounds like what some are saying here.

I know. I was being facetious.

If side-loading is important to you, you should have done your research about iOS being locked down before purchasing your iPhone, rather than rely on government to force regulations on businesses.

I really don't see how you are YAY BREAK UP APP STORE!!!!! and in the same topic say YOU NEED TO MOVE!

Again, I will say the same thing - Get Android. Leave iOS alone and just buy an Android. Believe me you will have a easier time switching than I will selling a house.

?‍♂️ See above.