Fortnite Dispute Between Apple and Epic Games Won't Have Jury Trial

[lowendlinux]

Someone here or Europe is going to find the right argument to open up the app store if it's not Epic it'll be another big multinational.

 

[ruka.snow]

Someone here or Europe is going to find the right argument to open up the app store if it's not Epic it'll be another big multinational.

Reform on the AppStore will be a good thing. But it won't have anything to do with the 30% cut nor allowing 3rd party stores. It'll be all about allowing apps that currently are not allowed such as sports books, racy interactive fiction, adult toy remotes, and other things Apple are currently blocking world wide even if it is only a few countries that are prudish.

 

[Maximara]

Interesting. I am not sure why Epic chose this path. I would think, a jury would view a fairness argument more favorably than judges (and that's a GOOD THING).
This is not about "my store, my rules", as some fanboys here would make you believe.
It's a larger issue than that.

Actually until the talks it was Apple who was in favor of the jury trial and Epic who wanted the bench trial. Have to wonder why Apple effectively blinked.

 

[jonnysods]

Man, I wonder if the Epic Board wished their CEO had taken a different route. Seems to have blown up in their faces a little, and surely their bottom line has been affected big time.

 

[amartinez1660]

I think this is a good move by both companies. It will be hard enough finding a judge who is competent to understand the issues involved but virtually impossible to find 12 jurors to understand the issues enough to give a proper verdict.

I’m trying to visualize what Apple could actually get from this, because up until now it’s been all Epic’s demands.
But is there anything beneficial for them to play ball? Why Apple doesn’t try and crush this on a fast track? It was my understanding that Apple was ok and forward with a jury hearing?

I find it quite something that they have agreed and played ball at least once.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Actually until the talks it was Apple who was in favor of the jury trial and Epic who wanted the bench trial. Have to wonder why Apple effectively blinked.

Wonder no more.

FTA: “In a counterclaim against Epic Games, Apple had originally asked for a trial by jury, but given that the judge overseeing the court told the two companies that she does not want to try two separate cases, Apple has withdrawn the request.”

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Actually until the talks it was Apple who was in favor of the jury trial and Epic who wanted the bench trial. Have to wonder why Apple effectively blinked.

I would hazard a guess that it is to keep the claim and counterclaim in the same court with the same judge. But I could be wrong

 

[CleverClock]

Epic games - epic fails lol lmao rofl

 

[cmaier]

Reform on the AppStore will be a good thing. But it won't have anything to do with the 30% cut nor allowing 3rd party stores. It'll be all about allowing apps that currently are not allowed such as sports books, racy interactive fiction, adult toy remotes, and other things Apple are currently blocking world wide even if it is only a few countries that are prudish.

sure. Because a court or government is going to rip up apple’s business model to force them to allow vibrator helper apps.

long been a priority of governments the world over.

 

[cmaier]

Actually until the talks it was Apple who was in favor of the jury trial and Epic who wanted the bench trial. Have to wonder why Apple effectively blinked.

Because Apple likes what they are hearing from judge Rogers, who already indicated she didn’t want two trials.

 

[bobenhaus]

Apple is going to be give hush hush money to Epic huh ?

 

[jprmercado]

The Epic Games situation, as summarized by Steve Jobs 10 years ago.

It's chilling how apt this is!

 

[Abazigal]

I’m trying to visualize what Apple could actually get from this, because up until now it’s been all Epic’s demands.
But is there anything beneficial for them to play ball? Why Apple doesn’t try and crush this on a fast track? It was my understanding that Apple was ok and forward with a jury hearing?

I find it quite something that they have agreed and played ball at least once.

Given that Apple has nothing to gain from a hasty resolution as well, every day Apple drags this out is a day Epic remains banned from the App Store. Whatever Apple loses in App Store revenue (which is inconsequential to them), Epic loses more (and the money is more impactful to their bottom line).

And the longer this court case goes on, the more Epic is revealed to be the hypocrite they are.

Let Apple string them out to dry.

 

[Analog Kid]

Actually until the talks it was Apple who was in favor of the jury trial and Epic who wanted the bench trial. Have to wonder why Apple effectively blinked.

No, I'm still trying to figure out why Epic didn't want a jury trial but Apple didn't blink. Apple accepted the bench trial because it doesn't matter to them how this is tried-- their case is cut and dried. It seemed that Epic has been pushing for an emotional response on all this, which is why I expected they'd prefer a jury trial. Maybe what they're after is to try and get a judge's ruling on a narrow technical point that would be too arcane to explain to a jury?

Are jury trials typically more expensive than bench trials? It may be that Epic knows they're going to lose but wants to keep this in the news as long a possible without spending much on it. They certainly don't seem to have prepared for any of the hearings to date...

 

[Alan Wynn]

Given that Apple has nothing to gain from a hasty resolution as well, every day Apple drags this out is a day Epic remains banned from the App Store.

This is absolutely the situation.

Whatever Apple loses in App Store revenue (which is inconsequential to them), Epic loses more (and the money is more impactful to their bottom line).

For Apple, its biggest upside is 30% of those v-bucks purchased via IAP. For Epic there are three losses:

1. 70% of the revenue generated via from v-bucks purchases that would have been made via IAP.
2. 95%+ of the revenue generated by iOS/iPadOS/macOS users would have made directly on their web store.
3. months of time in which all these ecosystem users will not be playing and may find another game that is a permanent replacement and those with whom they would normally play.

The third loss is the most serious for them (with respect to Fortnite). From what we have seen and heard, there were quite a few groups that were multi-platform. Some of those will get their Apple and Google ecosystem users to move to a different platform, others will just move on to something different. Like many things that are habit driven, once users move to something else, they may never come back.

The longer this goes on the more serious that third issue becomes.

 

[TheSapient]

That’s like saying “bob only shops at walmart. If you want to sell your widget to bob, there’s only one store.”

Who says you have a fundamental right to sell to bob?

That just further shows how terrible the analogy is. In this analogy, Bob can ONLY shop at Walmart, because his house was built by Walmart. This analogy makes the claim that it is reasonable for Apple to require all apps used on iPhones be purchased from the Apple app store in the same way it is reasonable for a home builder to require anyone who buys a home to do all their shopping at a store owned by that builder. And that is a terrible argument to make.

Note I am not commenting on the merits of the case here, Just pointing out that equating Apple's app store to a physical store makes Apple's app store look crazy awful.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

That just further shows how terrible the analogy is. In this analogy, Bob can ONLY shop at Walmart, because his house was built by Walmart. This analogy makes the claim that it is reasonable for Apple to require all apps used on iPhones be purchased from the Apple app store in the same way it is reasonable for a home builder to require anyone who buys a home to do all their shopping at a store owned by that builder. And that is a terrible argument to make.

Note I am not commenting on the merits of the case here, Just pointing out that equating Apple's app store to a physical store makes Apple's app store look crazy awful.

Yet that isn’t accurate. Bob can shop elsewhere, it’s just that Walmart won’t allow Target to advertise tor free inside Walmart that Bob can also go to target for less. Target is free to advertise that elsewhere. And Bob can do that. Also on iOS.

 

[bpeeps]

Thank you, Epic! for fighting the fight for all. You will be acknowledged later regardless of the outcome.

No “safety and privacy” bsh*t can cover the unfairness of the AppStore’s policies.

(Edit: Wow, y’all hateful). I will be donating to Epic's effort for each dislike on my comment.

lmao imagine donating pennies to a billion-dollar company for no other reason than receiving dislike emojis on the internet. spend your money where it might actually make a difference.

• Environmental Defense Group
• American Humane
• Scholarship America
• The Trevor Project
• Action Against Hunger

 

[Maximara]

My guess is that Epic withdraws or settles before a verdict is rendered. They’ve set up a very flimsy argument that is already being shot full of holes. To top it off Amazon is launching Luna and showing you can do things outside the App Store if you don’t want to follow guidelines. The final nail in this will most likely come in the form of pressure from other companies like Match, Tile, Hey email, or Spotify. If Apple wins the case against Epic, it sets legal precedent and hurts all future attempts by other complainers that may have a stronger case and didn’t start off on such a bad foot. These other companies have every reason to tell epic to shut up and back off. Coupling that with the money they lose every single day by not having Fortnite on Android or iOS and the long term damage it’s doing to one of their most valuable games by turning two large player base platforms away, I don’t think they’re going to do too well.

Given Apple has a countersuit (rather than a counterclaim, unless the new outlets have that wrong) wouldn't the legal precedent be set in any case?

Also given some of these companies are basically cheering Epic as it seems to be legally driving its car off a cliff and wondering why the ground is coming up to greet them I think too many or them can't see the full implication of this.

 

[gaximus]

Thank you, Epic! for fighting the fight for all. You will be acknowledged later regardless of the outcome.

No “safety and privacy” bsh*t can cover the unfairness of the AppStore’s policies.

(Edit: Wow, y’all hateful). I will be donating to Epic's effort for each dislike on my comment.

So you get to waste your money every time we dislike, this will be fun.

 

[TheSapient]

Yet that isn’t accurate. Bob can shop elsewhere, it’s just that Walmart won’t allow Target to advertise tor free inside Walmart that Bob can also go to target for less. Target is free to advertise that elsewhere. And Bob can do that. Also on iOS.

Wait. Bob shops at Walmart (Apple's app store), meaning that Bob has a Walmart Home (Apple iphone). Bob can NOT shop around. He can't some other store. You can't sell him your home made furniture unless you take it to Walmart and give them 30% of the price. His house won't allow him to bring in anything that is not from the Walmart.

It is a terrible analogy.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

 

[MacNeb]

Wait. Bob shops at Walmart (Apple's app store), meaning that Bob has a Walmart Home (Apple iphone). Bob can NOT shop around. He can't some other store. You can't sell him your home made furniture unless you take it to Walmart and give them 30% of the price. His house won't allow him to bring in anything that is not from the Walmart.

It is a terrible analogy.

That's not true at all. Bob can still shop around if I somehow let him know, outside of using the Walmart store to tell him, that he can get furniture from me cheaper at Target.

It's no different than me having the Kindle app and having to go to Amazon's website to purchase the books I want to then read using the app on my iPhone/iPad. I'm not limited to buying e-books only from Apple.

 

[Analog Kid]

That's not true at all. Bob can still shop around if I somehow let him know, outside of using the Walmart store to tell him, that he can get furniture from me cheaper at Target.

It's no different than me having the Kindle app and having to go to Amazon's website to purchase the books I want to then read using the app on my iPhone/iPad. I'm not limited to buying e-books only from Apple.

Also: Bob can move if he doesn't like his neighborhood.

And it's Bob's choice what house he buys, not the retailer's and not the court's.

 

[bushman4]

Only way that losses are held to a minimum is if Apple and Epic negotiate. This will drag on for a while. Customer is the big loser no matter what