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

[Abazigal]

@huge_apple_fangirl

How would things be any better had Apple Music not existed and there was only Spotify in the market? They are slow to support new iOS features and their design language stinks (to me, at least). At least Apple gives me meaningful choice and the assurance that their services will be properly supported for years to come.

For better and for worse, I am of the opinion that music streaming is not a sustainable business model, and in the near future, Spotify may hate either gone bankrupt or merged with Netflix or gotten acquired by another tech giant. It’s a platform feature to be propped up by profits from elsewhere.

It’s probably better for everyone that such a critical piece of infrastructure be under Apple’s control than be farmed out to a third party.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

I hear what you're saying... that it might be "unfair" that Apple's music service comes pre-installed on every iPhone.

It’s not about being “unfair“. I fully support Apple’s right to be unfair when it benefits me, the consumer. When they start using a device I payed for to nudge me for more money, at the expense of the best experience for me, and are also screwing over third party devs in the process- yeah I’m happy to see Apple reigned in.

 

[Michael Scrip]

It’s not about being “unfair“. I fully support Apple’s right to be unfair when it benefits me, the consumer. When they start using a device I payed for to nudge me for more money, at the expense of the best experience for me, and are also screwing over third party devs in the process- yeah I’m happy to see Apple reigned in.

Maybe we should have a talk with Google too... they keep bothering me to upgrade to Youtube Premium! And I keep saying no! ?

Anyways... I still don't see why having to download the Apple Music app would suddenly level the playing field.

People already download the Spotify app... so it's obviously not that difficult.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

@huge_apple_fangirl

How would things be any better had Apple Music not existed and there was only Spotify in the market?

It would be better if Apple Music, Spotify, and on-device music were equally supported by Apple, so that all Apple’s users got a top tier music experience. I am pro the existence of Apple Music, I just don’t want it owned (or at least not favored) by Apple. We Spotify users paid Apple just as much for our devices as Apple Music users did.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Maybe we should have a talk with Google too... they keep bothering me to upgrade to Youtube Premium! And I keep saying no! ?

Anyways... I still don't see why having to download the Apple Music app would suddenly level the playing field.

People already download the Spotify app... so it's obviously not a challenge.

What I want is:
1) ability to make Spotify default music player
2) easy way to download songs from online to music app
3) not being asked to sign up for a subscription I don’t want in my music app (or in News. Stop showing me News+ content I can’t read!)
4) no being nudged to sign up for subscriptions in settings/notifications

It‘s not only about fairness for Spotify. It’s about Apple annoying me because of it.

 

[Michael Scrip]

What I want is:
1) ability to make Spotify default music player
2) easy way to download songs from online to music app
3) not being asked to sign up for a subscription I don’t want in my music app (or in News. Stop showing me News+ content I can’t read!)
4) no being nudged to sign up for subscriptions in settings/notifications

It‘s not only about fairness for Spotify. It’s about Apple annoying me because of it.

I see. Thanks for the explanation!

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Abusing their position? Apple got to their position by doing this! Consumers like it.

And Facebook and Microsoft became the biggest companies in the world by breaking many anti competitive laws. Consumer “liking” witch you have no data on is not a defense for abusing their position

Where I agree is that paid apps should not have privileged APIs. So yes Apple Music and TV+ should not have advantages over Spotify and Netflix. This sort of privileging on Apple's part adversely affects those who use competing services. But when Apple takes a paid feature (like Astropad) and integrates it into the OS for free that helps consumers.

Well as long as apple allows them on equal terms and don’t deny them access for doing something iOS do. Example f.lux

Apple is a vertically integrated firm. There is no difference to them between the OS or its bundled apps (again, exception is paid apps like Music which are available on other platforms and clearly are not OS-dependent).

The difference is not interesting what apple thinks, it’s all about other apps should be able to do the same thing. If you can erase the app you should be able to replace the app

Apple would argue that WebKit is an integral part of iOS so they should be able to block other web engines. Competitors would argue Safari is an app and they should have the same access. There is no clear place to draw the line, but when you're talking about Apple, it's the wrong question.

Not at all, if all browsers can use WebKit to construct their own browser in the same way chromium is used to construct difrent browsers it shouldn’t be any difference as long as they have the same access as safari

Apple makes unified products. Asking them to divide up their OS and features across arbitrary lines in the sand to allow other parties greater access to the platform (a platform that, need I remind you, Apple built) is an attack on Apple products' unique value preposition.

I’m sorry but just because apple built it doesn’t give them the right to anything they want when they allow competitors on their platform. If it was only apple and no 3d party apps it would be a different question. It could as simply be that apple would be forced to split away from the App Store as an independent company

Even if it's a security risk? Apple needs to have certain privileges as the OS maker. Why should any app developer be able to demand the same?

Apple needs to prove this security risk. They can’t just claim it. Apple have privileges as the OS maker but still need to treat the App Store in a fair and unbiased manner

Apple's customers appreciate its ability to leverage its vertical integration.

Absolutely, still not an argument to stifle competition

American tech companies absolutely pay taxes to Europe. And EU is huge on subsidizing and "picking winners and losers"- literally how they built Airbus up over the years. Then they accuse the US of subsidizing Boeing for paying Boeing for government contracts, which is not all equivalent.

No they aren’t, why do you think EU have pushed for a minimum global tax so that all profits apple make in Germany is payed in Germany, all the profits made in Sweden is payed in Sweden instead of constructing tax schemes circumventing loopholes to pay 1% in Ireland instead of 20% that so the average in EU.
Apple isn’t even their biggest concern but Global talks over the accord have been going on for years amid growing protests from European policymakers over how little tax tech giants such as Google, Facebook and Amazon pay into national taxes on the profits they make on their citizens.

Of course, EU is free to do what they want in their territory. As am I free to point out that they are massive hypocrites. And the US government is free to (and should be much more aggressive when they) push back against Europe's blatant attempts to hurt and stifle successful US companies, whether through discriminatory, targeted legislation or unfair subsidies.

Both are in a trade dispute and the WTO have concluded both have broke the rules.
Eu is not going to apologize for wanting US companies making a profit on their citizens should pay equal tax as any other domestic company.

Just for giggles I looked online to see what people in Europe thought about the EU holding itself together. "In France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, Slovakia, Romania, Greece, the Czech Republic and Poland, a majority of people surveyed thought EU disintegration was a “realistic possibility” in the next 10 to 20 years."

We have lived through two world wars, had the USSR collapse on our doorsteps and the Yugoslav war etc etc.

Research showed that levels of support for membership of the European Union are high – but so is pessimism about the future of the bloc.

I would say it’s better to be pessimistic and actively try and fix its problems then to be blindly optimistic and letting things fester

​

Such wonderful optimism. /s. Seriously most times the EU comes off as less dysfunctional than the US with its regional squabbling so I wonder why the people in the EU have such a dim view of its future.

We have our recent history to look at. USA haven’t really had anything special happen outside of your civil war etc comparatively speaking WW2 in 1945 blowing everything apart, USSR occupation until 1991, growing tension with Russia and USA as our different interests splits.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

What I want is:
1) ability to make Spotify default music player
2) easy way to download songs from online to music app
3) not being asked to sign up for a subscription I don’t want in my music app (or in News. Stop showing me News+ content I can’t read!)
4) no being nudged to sign up for subscriptions in settings/notifications

It‘s not only about fairness for Spotify. It’s about Apple annoying me because of it.

Well I would love the ability to subscribe in the app. And unfortunately apple is unfairly benefiting their own services when they effectively can undercut competitors price with 30%

For Netflix to earn the same as AppleTV+ they need to have a 30% higher price.
And Spotify must do the same thing, and still have their hands tied behind their back.

But yes I would love for apple to stop annoying me about testing or upgrade to their services I have 0 interest in.

 

[I7guy]

Well I would love the ability to subscribe in the app. And unfortunately apple is unfairly benefiting their own services when they effectively can undercut competitors price with 30%

For Netflix to earn the same as AppleTV+ they need to have a 30% higher price.
And Spotify must do the same thing, and still have their hands tied behind their back.

But yes I would love for apple to stop annoying me about testing or upgrade to their services I have 0 interest in.

Did it ever come out in the trial there is not a 30% internal charge back for Apple Music subscriptions. Additionally, Apple music subscriptions can be had outside of the app, in fact, outside of Apple. ATV+ signed up outside the app and again....can you confirm there is a 30% internal charge back or not?

And this:

For Netflix to earn the same as AppleTV+ they need to have a 30% higher price.

Are you trying to equate revenue dollars or profit dollars? You're trying to criticize Apple with a straw-man statement.

 

[Maximara]

And Facebook and Microsoft became the biggest companies in the world by breaking many anti competitive laws. Consumer “liking” witch you have no data on is not a defense for abusing their position

True but "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." _ Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 812 Filed 09/10/21

Apple needs to prove this security risk. They can’t just claim it.

"Thus, the Court finds that centralized distribution through the App Store increases security in the “narrow” sense, primarily by thwarting social engineering attacks."

"Thus, the Court finds that app distribution restrictions increase security in the “broad” sense by allowing Apple to filter fraud, objectionable content, and piracy during app review while imposing heightened requirements for privacy."

Apple already proved ithat its action increase security to a US court. Unless what the EU is doing is actual protectionism under different name they should find the same thing.

No they aren’t, why do you think EU have pushed for a minimum global tax so that all profits apple make in Germany is payed in Germany, all the profits made in Sweden is payed in Sweden instead of constructing tax schemes circumventing loopholes to pay 1% in Ireland instead of 20% that so the average in EU.

The US has the same problem (IRS can't tax overseas profits until they come back to the US) so this isn't just a EU problem. Never mind who would get the money from this minimum global tax? Then you would have the issue of is it cumulative to whatever the local tax is? It would be a bureaucratic mess and penalize poor nations who are trying to simply function. Never mind some (~1%) of Apple stock is owned by a EU company - Norges Bank to the tune of $29,791,305,115; yes that is $29 (short) billion.

Apple isn’t even their biggest concern but Global talks over the accord have been going on for years amid growing protests from European policymakers over how little tax tech giants such as Google, Facebook and Amazon pay into national taxes on the profits they make on their citizens.

It isn't just the EU and tech giants. As I pointed out there was that $228 Million windfall Activation got from the US government ever though it had made a $447 million profit. As one article put it "that’s an effective tax rate of -51 percent. Yes, that’s a “negative” before the number. And yes, that adds up to more than half its profit for that year." And and let's not forget them firing 800 people after they got that windfall.

So if we here in the US didn't get tax money for that $447 million and the EU didn't who the bloody blue blazes did?!

Both are in a trade dispute and the WTO have concluded both have broke the rules.
Eu is not going to apologize for wanting US companies making a profit on their citizens should pay equal tax as any other domestic company.

So if the US pays Activision so much money they are at a -51% tax rate the EU should as well. Uh, do you realize how absolutely bonkers that is?! If the US can't properly tax its own companies what chance does the EU have?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Did it ever come out in the trial there is not a 30% internal charge back for Apple Music subscriptions. Additionally, Apple music subscriptions can be had outside of the app, in fact, outside of Apple. ATV+ signed up outside the app and again....can you confirm there is a 30% internal charge back or not?

Apple is the one who needs to prove this, who would this 30% otherwise go to but themselves?
Apple can charge the same price for Apple Music and ATV+ In their App Store or their homepage with the same revenues.
Spotify and Netflix can’t. The same price in apple App Store is less revenue compared to their website.

And this:

Are you trying to equate revenue dollars or profit dollars? You're trying to criticize Apple with a straw-man statement.

I’m talking about revenue dollars.
On the store apple takes 30% of Spotify/Netflix subscription revenue.
Apple Music/ATV+ pay ether 0 or 30% to themselves as the owner of the store.

True but "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." _ Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 812 Filed 09/10/21

We will se what EU will do as they look at other factors.

"Thus, the Court finds that centralized distribution through the App Store increases security in the “narrow” sense, primarily by thwarting social engineering attacks."

"Thus, the Court finds that app distribution restrictions increase security in the “broad” sense by allowing Apple to filter fraud, objectionable content, and piracy during app review while imposing heightened requirements for privacy."

Apple already proved ithat its action increase security to a US court. Unless what the EU is doing is actual protectionism under different name they should find the same thing.

Not at all, for EU can reject Epics claim and still come to the conclusion apple abuses its position and need to treat their apps on equal terms to competing apps. And/or the need to allow different payments solutions for in app purchases next to their standard offer without taking a commission, or perhaps that apple can’t stop approved apps from being distributed somewhere else etc.

One lawsuit between two companies the CJEU reaffirmed that consumers have the right to resell a license as programs and goods are treated exactly the same.

The US has the same problem (IRS can't tax overseas profits until they come back to the US) so this isn't just a EU problem. Never mind who would get the money from this minimum global tax?

The solution with the global tax rate is that it remove the advantages to shift revenue

..Governments could still set whatever local corporate tax rate they want, but if companies pay lower rates in a particular country, their home governments could "top up" their taxes to the 15% minimum, eliminating the advantage of shifting profits.


A second track of the overhaul would allow countries where revenues are earned to tax 25% of the largest multinationals' so-called excess profit - defined as profit in excess of 10% of revenue…

Then you would have the issue of is it cumulative to whatever the local tax is? It would be a bureaucratic mess and penalize poor nations who are trying to simply function. Never mind some (~1%) of Apple stock is owned by a EU company - Norges Bank to the tune of $29,791,305,115; yes that is $29 (short) billion.

It means if a nation have 1% tax rate the nation they make the income can effectively collect the tax equivalent to 15% effectively penciling tax havens by collecting it anyway.
If a nation have 25% tax and collect it then nothing will happen

It isn't just the EU and tech giants. As I pointed out there was that $228 Million windfall Activation got from the US government ever though it had made a $447 million profit. As one article put it "that’s an effective tax rate of -51 percent. Yes, that’s a “negative” before the number. And yes, that adds up to more than half its profit for that year." And and let's not forget them firing 800 people after they got that windfall.

Hopefully global minimum tax rate will fix that. As well as making shell companies unable to use tax windfalls.

So if we here in the US didn't get tax money for that $447 million and the EU didn't who the bloody blue blazes did?!

Activision got it. And several EU states have sent them a tax bill or is dragging them in court for tax fraud

So if the US pays Activision so much money they are at a -51% tax rate the EU should as well. Uh, do you realize how absolutely bonkers that is?! If the US can't properly tax its own companies what chance does the EU have?

Eu tax law is way simpler, and we don’t have a 0% tax rate USA have one of the most complex tax system in the world. And the cracking down on shell companies that EU seems to implement.
Plus difrent tax revenues a company cat escape. VAT is more efficient than US sales tax , employment tax

 

[I7guy]

Apple is the one who needs to prove this, who would this 30% otherwise go to but themselves?
Apple can charge the same price for Apple Music and ATV+ In their App Store or their homepage with the same revenues.
Spotify and Netflix can’t. The same price in apple App Store is less revenue compared to their website.

I’m talking about revenue dollars.
On the store apple takes 30% of Spotify/Netflix subscription revenue.
Apple Music/ATV+ pay ether 0 or 30% to themselves as the owner of the store.

[...]

You are assuming there is no internal chargeback for iap subscriptions. There very well could be. However, one can go to spotify dot com and sign up and give spotify the 100% revenue to which they are entitled. (/s)

 

[dk001]

Apple is the one who needs to prove this, who would this 30% otherwise go to but themselves?
Apple can charge the same price for Apple Music and ATV+ In their App Store or their homepage with the same revenues.
Spotify and Netflix can’t. The same price in apple App Store is less revenue compared to their website.

I’m talking about revenue dollars.
On the store apple takes 30% of Spotify/Netflix subscription revenue.
Apple Music/ATV+ pay ether 0 or 30% to themselves as the owner of the store.

We will se what EU will do as they look at other factors.

Not at all, for EU can reject Epics claim and still come to the conclusion apple abuses its position and need to treat their apps on equal terms to competing apps. And/or the need to allow different payments solutions for in app purchases next to their standard offer without taking a commission, or perhaps that apple can’t stop approved apps from being distributed somewhere else etc.

One lawsuit between two companies the CJEU reaffirmed that consumers have the right to resell a license as programs and goods are treated exactly the same.

The solution with the global tax rate is that it remove the advantages to shift revenue



It means if a nation have 1% tax rate the nation they make the income can effectively collect the tax equivalent to 15% effectively penciling tax havens by collecting it anyway.
If a nation have 25% tax and collect it then nothing will happen

Hopefully global minimum tax rate will fix that. As well as making shell companies unable to use tax windfalls.

Activision got it. And several EU states have sent them a tax bill or is dragging them in court for tax fraud

Eu tax law is way simpler, and we don’t have a 0% tax rate USA have one of the most complex tax system in the world. And the cracking down on shell companies that EU seems to implement.
Plus difrent tax revenues a company cat escape. VAT is more efficient than US sales tax , employment tax

Our tax system here is seriously fubar'd.
Getting it fixed? Dreaming...... too much money and lobbying to get anything meaningful through Congress.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

You are assuming there is no internal chargeback for iap subscriptions. There very well could be.

What data or information is there for you or anyone to assume this internal charge back exist?

However, one can go to spotify dot com and sign up and give spotify the 100% revenue to which they are entitled. (/s)

Then allow them link to their homepage with 30% lower price then.

 

[I7guy]

What data or information is there for you or anyone to assume this internal charge back exist?

I'm making the same assumptions you are, except in the opposite direction. What data or information is out there where you can determine there aren't internal chargebacks.

Then allow them link to their homepage with 30% lower price then.

They don't need Apple for that. On their website they charge: $9.99. Easy as a country morning. (Right now in the US the anti-steering provision was put on-hold)

 

[Wildkraut]

+1 Like!

Microsoft says that if Apple isn't stopped now, its antitrust behavior will just get worse | AppleInsider

Microsoft has filed an amicus brief supporting Epic Games in its appeal against Apple, and argues that, "the potential antitrust issues stretch far beyond gaming."

appleinsider.com

 

[Force11111]

"Pay us 30% or you don't get access to 60% of U.S. consumers." "Only the kind of apps we say, are allowed to be installed on iPhone."

Those terms.

I'm not sure that the 15/30% is really all that unfair. But I particularly hate the second one. I feel like they're really stifling innovation. But I doubt forcing side loading would change anything. If android is any indication apps will still go through the stock ios app store and still be subject to the app store rules.

 

[I7guy]

+1 Like!

Microsoft says that if Apple isn't stopped now, its antitrust behavior will just get worse | AppleInsider

Microsoft has filed an amicus brief supporting Epic Games in its appeal against Apple, and argues that, "the potential antitrust issues stretch far beyond gaming."

appleinsider.com

Lol, says the company who left the fox guarding the hen house. Big lol @That.

 

[Maximara]

+1 Like!

Microsoft says that if Apple isn't stopped now, its antitrust behavior will just get worse | AppleInsider

Microsoft has filed an amicus brief supporting Epic Games in its appeal against Apple, and argues that, "the potential antitrust issues stretch far beyond gaming."

appleinsider.com

Microsoft warning about Apple becoming more monopolist. Those who live in glass houses...

 

[vipergts2207]

Lol, says the company who left the fox guarding the hen house. Big lol @That.

You have a good point, keeping in mind the proverbial phrase "it takes a thief to catch a thief" or "it takes one to know one." Perhaps we could apply a version of that concept with regard to Microsoft and Apple here. *cough* antitrust *cough*

 

[Ethosik]

You have a good point, keeping in mind the proverbial phrase "it takes a thief to catch a thief" or "it takes one to know one." Perhaps we could apply a version of that concept with regard to Microsoft and Apple here. *cough* antitrust *cough*

Oh reminds me of a show I used to watch, one of the very few reality shows I enjoy.

 

[dk001]

+1 Like!

Microsoft says that if Apple isn't stopped now, its antitrust behavior will just get worse | AppleInsider

Microsoft has filed an amicus brief supporting Epic Games in its appeal against Apple, and argues that, "the potential antitrust issues stretch far beyond gaming."

appleinsider.com

However if Epic does not change some of the verbiage I suspect MS expanded "fear" about the landscape will be ignored or discounted as not relevant.

 

[dk001]

I'm not sure that the 15/30% is really all that unfair. But I particularly hate the second one. I feel like they're really stifling innovation. But I doubt forcing side loading would change anything. If android is any indication apps will still go through the stock ios app store and still be subject to the app store rules.

This is the interesting aspect. If secondary stores do arise (provided sideloading is the solution) this may be predominately US driven. However there could be a number of smaller venues that might be region or country specific.

Either way, this is very interesting mostly due to the potential impact.

Edited for spellcheck - iOS spell check kinda sucks.

 

[dk001]

Microsoft warning about Apple becoming more monopolist. Those who live in glass houses...

Reusing them rocks at MS I see..... then again, they should know how to aim them ?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I'm making the same assumptions you are, except in the opposite direction. What data or information is out there where you can determine there aren't internal chargebacks.

What we can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence

My assumption is based on the fact no such data have been presented by apple in any court data I have seen anywhere.
And as the famous saying goes absence of evidence is evidence of absence

They don't need Apple for that. On their website they charge: $9.99. Easy as a country morning. (Right now in the US the anti-steering provision was put on-hold)

It’s not a question of “need” but a question of anti competitive. Apple can charge 9.99 and keep 100%
Spotify charge 9.99 but keeps only 6.99 And would have to have ask for 14.2$ to earn the same revenue paying their rival that came after Spotify.

And can’t even refer to their homepage to pay 9.99$ because of apples anti steering rule. Or as EU said last year

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388071379094982659