4 ms·

Ooph. I'm betting that Epic was expecting to get to stay on the app store during the trial. That's an expensive difference. I would guess that Epic will retract

Ooph. I'm betting that Epic was expecting to get to stay on the app store during the trial. That's an expensive difference. I would guess that Epic will retract its change and ask to be relisted on the app store (and if that doesn't happen, seek rapid redress in the court, since this TRO decision explicitly lists Epic's ability to be reinstated as a rationale for why there is no risk of irrevocable harm).

modeless 6y ago
I'd take that bet. I think Epic (Tim Sweeney, really) was prepared to lose that revenue to win the war. This ruling is what I expected and seems quite reasonable. Epic doesn't get temporary special privileges to break App Store rules (even though they are alleged to be illegal), but also Apple can't retaliate against them in other areas. If Epic does reverse the payment changes in an attempt to return Fortnite to the App Store until the lawsuit is resolved, I doubt Apple will let them back in unless forced by the court (despite Tim Cook's "Sir, we do not retaliate or bully people").
- threeseed 6y ago
  People seem to act like this is the first App Store dispute. There have been many over the last decade and Apple's behaviour has been consistent i.e. they will simply allow Epic to come back onto the store and pretend like nothing ever happened. Exactly like we saw recently with the Hey app. Apple doesn't want to punish developers but they will play hard ball if they don't abide by the rules.
  - fxtentacle 6y ago
    This appears to be the first dispute where Apple aggressively retaliated in unrelated areas of business.
    - philliphaydon 6y ago
      > This appears to be the first dispute where Apple aggressively retaliated in unrelated areas of business. But it's also the first publish dispute where someone purposely put in code to activate alternative payment options and broke the rules. Apple is setting an example of epic. Don't break the rules.
      - modeless 6y ago
        No it's not https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/21/netflix-itunes-2/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/21/netflix-itunes-2/
        philliphaydon 6y ago
        Yes it is, Netflix didn't hide code and then later enable it to support another payment option inside their app. They tried to redirect users to a website when signing up for premium. What Epic did was hide code and later enable the feature.
        modeless 6y ago
        Netflix hid code and later enabled it to redirect users to a non-Apple payment method. Epic hid code and later enabled it to redirect users to a non-Apple payment method. They did the exact same thing.
        philliphaydon 6y ago
        Have you got citation? I cannot find anything on google about Netflix hiding and enabling code. The only thing your link states is once the subscription ends the user is redirected to the browser to pay, so, not the same time.
dogma1138 6y ago
I don’t think Epic is making that much money from Fortnite on iOS to actually care, I think they are using Apple because a) its an easy target and if they win the ruling can be expanded to other platforms too where they currently make the most money on and b) while they aren’t a major source of revenue now Epic probably has bigger plans for mobile centric games down the line. Basically now it’s the best time for them to do it, Apple is a huge target and they can gain industry support, Fortnite is big enough that even the average judge, jurist and jury member is likely aware of it and right now they stand to lose very little financially from not being on iOS while the potential future gains are insane.
- CobrastanJorji 6y ago
  It's possible that revenue has fallen off, but it appears that Fortnite Mobile revenue has been at least $500 million per year. If this trial goes on for two years, that's potentially a billion dollars in lost revenue. https://sensortower.com/blog/fortnite-mobile-revenue-1-billion https://sensortower.com/blog/fortnite-mobile-revenue-1-billi...
  - imtringued 6y ago
    Assuming they introduce the epic store and cut fees from 30% to 0% fees. It would take 6 years to pay the lost revenue back. It's entirely possible that the next hot thing will come out in 6 years and replace Fortnite.
  - reissbaker 6y ago
    Epic makes over $5B/year — and more than $680 million of that is from the Epic Game Store [1], which has always been banned from iOS due to Apple's policies against alternative stores. Fortnite Mobile makes them good money, but it's not their cash cow — and if they can trade a temporary ban on Fortnite for their store running on iOS, it seems like they'll take it. 1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/01/14/epic-games-store-has-hit-680-million-in-revenue-108-million-customers/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/01/14/epic-games...
  - dogma1138 6y ago

modeless 6y ago

I'd take that bet. I think Epic (Tim Sweeney, really) was prepared to lose that revenue to win the war. This ruling is what I expected and seems quite reasonable. Epic doesn't get temporary special privileges to break App Store rules (even though they are alleged to be illegal), but also Apple can't retaliate against them in other areas. If Epic does reverse the payment changes in an attempt to return Fortnite to the App Store until the lawsuit is resolved, I doubt Apple will let them back in unless forced by the court (despite Tim Cook's "Sir, we do not retaliate or bully people").

threeseed 6y ago
People seem to act like this is the first App Store dispute. There have been many over the last decade and Apple's behaviour has been consistent i.e. they will simply allow Epic to come back onto the store and pretend like nothing ever happened. Exactly like we saw recently with the Hey app. Apple doesn't want to punish developers but they will play hard ball if they don't abide by the rules.
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  This appears to be the first dispute where Apple aggressively retaliated in unrelated areas of business.
  - philliphaydon 6y ago
    > This appears to be the first dispute where Apple aggressively retaliated in unrelated areas of business. But it's also the first publish dispute where someone purposely put in code to activate alternative payment options and broke the rules. Apple is setting an example of epic. Don't break the rules.
    - modeless 6y ago
      No it's not https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/21/netflix-itunes-2/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/21/netflix-itunes-2/
      - philliphaydon 6y ago
        Yes it is, Netflix didn't hide code and then later enable it to support another payment option inside their app. They tried to redirect users to a website when signing up for premium. What Epic did was hide code and later enable the feature.
        modeless 6y ago
        Netflix hid code and later enabled it to redirect users to a non-Apple payment method. Epic hid code and later enabled it to redirect users to a non-Apple payment method. They did the exact same thing.
        philliphaydon 6y ago
        Have you got citation? I cannot find anything on google about Netflix hiding and enabling code. The only thing your link states is once the subscription ends the user is redirected to the browser to pay, so, not the same time.

dogma1138 6y ago

I don’t think Epic is making that much money from Fortnite on iOS to actually care, I think they are using Apple because a) its an easy target and if they win the ruling can be expanded to other platforms too where they currently make the most money on and b) while they aren’t a major source of revenue now Epic probably has bigger plans for mobile centric games down the line. Basically now it’s the best time for them to do it, Apple is a huge target and they can gain industry support, Fortnite is big enough that even the average judge, jurist and jury member is likely aware of it and right now they stand to lose very little financially from not being on iOS while the potential future gains are insane.

CobrastanJorji 6y ago
It's possible that revenue has fallen off, but it appears that Fortnite Mobile revenue has been at least $500 million per year. If this trial goes on for two years, that's potentially a billion dollars in lost revenue. https://sensortower.com/blog/fortnite-mobile-revenue-1-billion https://sensortower.com/blog/fortnite-mobile-revenue-1-billi...
- imtringued 6y ago
  Assuming they introduce the epic store and cut fees from 30% to 0% fees. It would take 6 years to pay the lost revenue back. It's entirely possible that the next hot thing will come out in 6 years and replace Fortnite.
- reissbaker 6y ago
  Epic makes over $5B/year — and more than $680 million of that is from the Epic Game Store [1], which has always been banned from iOS due to Apple's policies against alternative stores. Fortnite Mobile makes them good money, but it's not their cash cow — and if they can trade a temporary ban on Fortnite for their store running on iOS, it seems like they'll take it. 1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/01/14/epic-games-store-has-hit-680-million-in-revenue-108-million-customers/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/01/14/epic-games...
- dogma1138 6y ago