Their device probably didnt add the periods unfortunately. I was stopping for sentences but you also dont need to breath to read it in your head.
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.
Judge in Apple v. Epic Case Sides With Apple on Fortnite and Epic on Unreal Engine [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
******** ask any convict. Hell you could have asked Friggen Big Ang from Mob Wives when she was alive. She had to get her constitutional rights restored before she could reopen her bar. That didn't happen, but yeah she had to get them restored because she was a convicted felon. D'oh.
Apple last week sent a letter to Epic Games letting the company know that if it does not comply with the App Store rules and remove direct payment options from Fortnite, that all of Epic's developer accounts and access to Apple development tools will be terminated on August 28.
That would impact Fortnite, other Epic Games, and the Unreal Engine used by third-party developers. Epic in response asked a Northern California court to stop Apple from ending Epic's App Store access with a temporary restraining order (TRO), and there was a court hearing on the matter today.
Right when the hearing kicked off, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who is overseeing the case, said that she was inclined to not grant relief with respect to games (including Fortnite), but that she was inclined to grant relief with respect to the Unreal Engine used by third-party developers. Rogers said that Epic created the current situation with Fortnite and could undo it by reverting to the status quo, so if her initial opinion is any indication of the outcome, we could see a restraining order that blocks Apple from restricting access to the Unreal Engine, but permits Apple to terminate the Epic Games developer account. Lawyers for Epic and Apple were both able to argue their positions, and given the initial inclinations of the judge, Epic largely focused on arguing why its games should be able to remain in the App Store without changes, while Apple focused on reasons why it should be able to block the Unreal Engine.
Epic's lawyer's argued that asking Epic to capitulate and go back to the status quo is akin to "asking us to require consumers to pay more than they should in a competitive environment" and that it had antitrust implications. "We can't go back into an anticompetitive contract," said Epic's lawyer. Epic also argued about the social aspects of the game, suggesting it was more than a mere game and a vital way to communicate during the pandemic.
Apple's lawyer argued that if Fortnite and other games are blocked from the App Store but development of the Unreal Engine is allowed to continue, Epic could just transfer its bad behavior to other entities. Apple also focused on potential harm to users and the need to enforce contracts, claiming that Epic broke Apple's App Store model, profited by it, and "placed customers in the middle." The judge said that it sounded like Apple was overreaching because Apple has separate contracts with Epic Games and Epic International for the Unreal Engine and one should not impact the other.Epic argued that the Unreal Engine would be "destroyed" if it's blocked on Apple's platforms because developers use it for cross platform development. Epic's lawyers said that Epic has already heard from developers who are abandoning the Unreal Engine due to Apple's threat. Apple's lawyer in turn said that everything would be resolved if Epic falls in line with the App Store rules and eliminates the direct payment option in Fortnite.
Toward the end of the meeting, the judge said that the battle isn't going to be won or lost with a temporary restraining order, as there is a long legal fight to come, and it's not a "slam dunk" for either company.The judge plans to provide a ruling on the issue in the near future, letting Apple and Epic know whether Apple will be allowed to block Epic from all developer tools and accounts, or whether a temporary restraining order will prevent the Cupertino company from doing so.
Article Link: Judge in Apple v. Epic Case 'Inclined' to Side With Apple on Fortnite and Epic on Unreal Engine
Nice piece of advice but it sounds a little condescending. Yes, I agree, the way she wrote the post makes it a little hard to read, but my brain was perfectly able to make sense of it, and I am FAR from being a genius.
Not everyone is a native English speaker. If you really want to be helpful, why not sending her a pm?
Welcome to curated software ecosystems.
You may be familiar with the concept from Nintendo, Sega, Atari, etc. of years gone by.
You pay royalties for using people's resources. Be it media codecs, software platform, OS libraries, payment processing, marketing platform, etc.
IMHO this is as simple as:
- EPIC signed up to the App Store, agreeing to the TOS
- EPIC violated the TOS
- EPIC's account is terminated for TOS violation.
If I violate EPIC's fortnight TOS, I get banned/etc.
If they want to argue the merits of whether Apple is a monopoly (hint: they aren't, android, MS, etc. platforms are bigger) then that's another issue. Good luck.
The 30% only applies to digital goods, not physical goods. So Amazon can sell you a movie on DVD, but not a digital copy of a movie. You’ll not that amazon doesn’t sell digital movies, TV shows, music, or audiobooks in their iPhone Apps.
As someone who has used every "ecosystem" available, I hope Apple can keep control of the world they created. They invented the iPhone and Appstore. I hate being nickel and dimed by games and DLC crap.
I disagree that there is a problem. A major part of the appeal of iOS (for me at least) is the efforts that Apple take to ensure downloadable app's are free of malicious content.
My experiences with Google Play and side loading APK's on Android simply enforce my belief that the restrictions Apple enforce make it a much better platform for many people. For the folks who don't mind or share that position, you have access to lots of Android app's that collect some or all your contacts / content, or include Malware, Spyware, and other problems with content loaded from the wide variety of third-party sources. I prefer to *use* my iOS devices and not spend a lot of time worrying about what hidden content has been installed on my device.
Your mileage may vary, but there are lots of people who genuinely like the Apple walled-garden approach and the comfort of not having to worry about malicious content or behaviour.
Try publish software on the Nintendo switch, Xbox One, Sony PS4/PS5, etc. and see what avenues you have.
Thats like saying you can only get your pc games from steam, origin, or as the other person stated the microsoft store, or like if you wanted a burger but had to order any type of burger you wanted through McDonald's. Apple refuses to let there be other ioS compatible app stores. While andriod and Google do allow that.
When did the Supreme Court declare that felons losing the franchise is unconstitutional?
There's no winners. Everyone loses but the biggest loser is the customer
Keep in mind that if fortnite is banned from iOs and MacOS it’s no longer a cross platform game
Keep in mind that if fortnite is banned from iOs and MacOS it’s no longer a cross platform game
Last edited:
I was referring to the fact that these people sit in prison for long as hell because they lose their 6th amendment right to a speedy trial. What conversation are you following?
[automerge]1598327762[/automerge]
Sadly its usually the truth though
look Im just going to say this and nothing else. Yes, it about the money, but its also about the industry and how outdated the law(s), or lack there of, have truely become. Order a CD to be delivered to your house on an Apple phone and they are charged basically nothing for that sale. Yet, you buy that same album digitally from the same company. Apple then turns and charges that same company 30% for that sale. Its stupidity you either charge all products digital or otherwise the same 30% or you lower the cut on digital products. That's the main complaint Epic has in these proceedings.
It sounds like Epic should resubmit without the game functionality and focus on providing essential communication services.
Isn't the whole issue that Epic changed how purchases were made by circumventing the app store review process? What's to stop Epic from doing it again.
You don’t lose your right to a speedy trial. You can waive it, which defendants often do for strategic or other reasons.
The bottom line is, Apple makes up whatever rules it wants. There’s nothing remotely “fair” about Apple’s rules. What makes ordering a bag of rice on Amazon any different from buying some V-Bucks? Apple has as much to do with that bag of rice as it does with the V-Bucks, yet they feel entitled to a cut of one and not the other. They force one company to use their payment system and let the other company use its own. Why? There’s no good reason.
Apple’s App Store rules are arbitrary and inconsistent, favoring certain companies over others. If I’m not mistaken, one can also buy some digital items through Amazon’s app as well. If Apple is entitled to 30% of V-Buck sales, why not 30% of the digital video game codes sold through Amazon’s app? To be fair, I’ve never bought a digital video game code on Amazon but there are clearly options for “PC Download” and “PS4 Digital Code”. Those aren’t physical goods.
And why is Apple entitled to a cut of V-Bucks and not my Uber ride? Why doesn’t Uber have to use Apple’s payment system? Because. That’s why. Apple said so. They’re trying to be everyone’s mommy and daddy these days anyway, and their nonsensical explanations for why some companies are exempt from rules or have different rules feels exactly like the parent when questioned. Because I said so. It makes no sense and eventually they will get their you-know-what handed to them in court over these unfair practices.
It's as fair as life.
Rice is real. Rice is a commodity? Rice isn't 100% revenue? Rice helps people?
A digital code software that isn't usable on the device making the purchase is not the same one made for the device.
Because it's their right to charge whatever they want. Would you prefer Apple buy apps licences from the developers one at at time and then set the prices they want?
This is nonsensical. “that’s the main complaint epic has.” That‘s ridiculous. If apple charged 30% for physical goods, epic would be doing exactly the same thing it is doing now.
The RIAA spent billions telling us that CD's and MP3's were different and that by ripping CDs we were changing the format authorized to us in the original license.