28 ms·

My feeling is that this whole situation is mostly going as Tim Sweeney intended. He was itching for a fight, wanted to sue Apple. The harsher that Apple retalia

by _qulr 6y ago

My feeling is that this whole situation is mostly going as Tim Sweeney intended. He was itching for a fight, wanted to sue Apple. The harsher that Apple retaliates, the better Epic's court case. Apple is playing right into his hands. Did Sweeney anticipate Apple's threat to Unreal Engine? Maybe, maybe not. But the temporary restraining order did block that threat, at least for now. I don't think Epic ever intended to release the new Fortnite season on Apple platforms. This is a long play, not a short play. In the short term, Epic loses money by not having Fortnite on Apple devices. But in the long term, it's much better for Epic to break Apple's App Store monopoly.

pier25 6y ago
> I don't think Epic ever intended to release the new Fortnite season on Apple platforms. Epic probably doesn't care much about Apple platforms. 80% of Fortnite players are on console. I doubt macOS accounts for more than 1-2%. https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoos-battle-royale-sentiment-study-understanding-the-phenomena-and-what-draws-players-to-particular-franchises/ https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoos-battle-royale-s...
- jeremyjh 6y ago
  Sure but a fair few play on iOS. If Apple user revenue didn't matter to Epic why would they have even started this to begin with?
  - 6nf 6y ago
    To serve as a warning to others
  - ragona 6y ago
    I wonder what percentage play exclusively on iOS though. If big spenders will spend on whatever is convenient it could be easily worth it to stop them from spending on iOS and get the cut back.
  - beached_whale 6y ago
    There are other App/Game stores. I think this is the first, but XBox/PS maybe in the future.
  - snuxoll 6y ago
    For the same reason they’ve pushed Epic Games Store on PC - they take 5% of gross revenue as royalties for any product that uses UE4 and lower fees charged by distribution channels makes that easier to swallow for both larger and smaller studios. Mind you, this is pure speculation on my part - but given they consider that 5% royalty paid as part of the fee for every title sold on EGS it seems likely that their goal is to sell more licenses, not just to cash in on Fortnite.
- nacs 6y ago
  You're completely ignoring iOS. Fortnite has been in the top 5 top-grossing games on iOS for over a year now making insane amounts via IAPs.
- burlesona 6y ago
  And ironically Epic is mum on all those consoles that take the exact same cut that Apple does. The iPhone is merely another console. Really hard for me to see why this is controversial, or why Epic thinks that Apple can have a monopoly over their console while somehow Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo don’t...
  - takeda 6y ago
    Maybe they chose the smallest market to fight this and set a new precedent?
  - kmeisthax 6y ago
    There's two possibilities. 1. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo have all negotiated smaller rev-share agreements with Epic. Maybe this is in exchange for marketing or console bundles or something else that improves the health of the platform. 2. Epic thinks they can use any victory they get out of Apple to force game console manufacturers to do the same thing. Personally, I think it's the latter - Epic's ultimate goal is to get their hands into the game distribution pie. One of the things Epic contemplates in the lawsuit is "we want to run our own iOS app store in competition with Apple's App Store". You bet their ass "Epic Game Store on Switch" is going to follow if they win the Apple lawsuit. (For the record, I happen to want Epic to win, though I don't want EPIC to win. I hate locked-down hardware.) You are correct in one critical way: there's no way in hell Epic would try this shit with console manufacturers. You know how Apple tried to threaten developer tools access and basically tried to take UE4 users hostage? Yeah, imagine that, except console manufacturers have far more leverage. First, console is Epic's core business; second, console developer access is very strictly guarded. Had the courts not enjoined Apple from revoking Epic's UE4 developer account, they could at least have hypothetically continued to support iOS customers. This isn't true on console: the developer tools are confidential and highly guarded. So, instead of "we might revoke your dev account access", it's "give us back our devkits, delete all your copies of our SDK, delete any UE4 code that uses that SDK, and stop selling UE4 on our platform". Epic wouldn't be allowed to support PS4/Switch/Xbox developers in any capacity. Just the mere act of a licensed console developer asking an unlicensed engine provider for support with the console SDK would constitute a breach of their confidentiality agreements.
- cavanasm 6y ago
  In court, Apple claimed that iOS payments are 12% of total Fortnite revenue, just for reference. It's not a death blow, but it's definitely impactful.
  - pier25 6y ago
    How can Apple know the total Fortnite revenue? Is this public knowledge?
    - cavanasm 6y ago
      As far as I'm aware, it isn't, but it could have been part of the filings for the temporary restraining order. The number is from this coverage of the hearing by a tech/legal reporter. https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/1298031302357082112?s=19 https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/1298031302357082112?s=...
sillysaurusx 6y ago
Could you provide any info showing that Apple was definitely going to block all unreal engine powered iOS apps from the App Store? Ideally definitive evidence.
- neurostimulant 6y ago
  Well, how could Epic continue developing unreal engine for iOS without a developer account?
  - lights0123 6y ago
    > Apple originally wanted to terminate the developer accounts of both Epic Games and Epic International, a separate account linked to Epic's Unreal Engine used by third-party app developers, but a judge issued a temporary restraining order preventing Apple from doing so.
    - neurostimulant 6y ago
      But this it just a temporary restraining order, right? Not final yet? Epic's future on apple ecosystem is not clear yet.
  - m4rtink 6y ago
    >Well, how could Epic continue developing unreal engine for iOS without a developer account? I thinl this nicely sumariges whats wrong - why the hell should one need an account somewhere to develop software for an OS! Thats a totally arbitrary limitation and as nicely illustrated by Apple - very very dangerous.
    - JiNCMG 6y ago
      You need an account to develop for Xbox, Sony and Switch.
      - DangitBobby 6y ago
cepp 6y ago
> In the short term, Epic loses money by not having Fortnite on Apple devices. Will they though? For all the players who already had the app they still have access to Epic's payment system meaning they're making 20% more on those transactions. I'm not sure that new user purchases will be > 20% they make in the short term from those existing users.
- pedroma 6y ago
  What are they going to buy? All the new content is on the other platforms.
  - an_opabinia 6y ago
    So the court case will wind up being a moot point. This is a technology forum, so speaking of technology... maybe there will just be some radical streaming or delivery innovation, compatible with Mobile Safari today, that could really change the state of at least games and movies on iOS. I wonder why that hasn't happened sooner.
- bdcravens 6y ago
  They have the app as long as they don't have to reinstall it (new or replacement phone)
  - metiscus 6y ago
    Perhaps that works for epic as well, giving apple customers an incentive to move to a platform that allows side loading?
    - thinkloop 6y ago
      Nobody sideloads, especially not kids
      - CydeWeys 6y ago
        Kids are technologically clever, and so long as one of them figures it out it's gonna virally spread to the rest of them. That's certainly how it was for me in school. So, I suspect that lots of people are going to be sideloading in the very near future.
kmonsen 6y ago
I am wondering how much Apple/iOS would be harmed by Unreal Engine goes away. Are they much better than the alternatives? I don't know.
- JiNCMG 6y ago
  They won't all the big companies release FPS on iOS are using their own engine (EA, Activision, etc). Using Unreal Engine for a casual mobile game is like buying a Ferrari to get some groceries 2 blocks away.
  - juskrey 6y ago
    They all use Unreal engine
mattmanser 6y ago
I can't see how Epic wins this. If Stripe can claim Wells Fargo doesn't want to process porn payments, and that's legal, how can an American court rule for Epic? Epic are obviously going to lose, and lose hard, or set a precedent that's going to screw every payment provider in America and open a flood gate for fraudulent payments. You can't force someone to sell something they don't want to, especially because Apple is nowhere near a monopoly in games or gaming sales, they can just point at steam. If somehow the American courts arrive at that judgement, and I am a non-lawyer, I put my hands up, but surely it's going to set all sorts of nasty precedents? Edit: The more I think about it the more absurd this is. It's as if some random brand of Mayo is suing Wallmart for not stocking their brand on their shelves. There is absolutely no way they can win this, unless American courts are going to start allowing "mom & pop" random ketchup brand to force Wallmart to stock it on their shelves. Apple doesn't have a monopoly on phones, it doesn't have a monopoly on games, it's got a store front you can buy stuff from, and if you don't want to play by their rules, then bye-bye. Wallmart choose their suppliers, and sets the markup, why can't Apple?
- _qulr 6y ago
  The iPhone is not a store. The App Store is a store. Epic wants to be on the iPhone, but not necessarily in the App Store. Ideally, Epic wants to run its own store on the iPhone. In any case, App Store is the only store in town, where the "town" is the 1.5 billion iOS users. If there's only 1 store, with no competing stores, that's an entirely different situation legally.
  - Spivak 6y ago
    Apple will do just fine arguing that their devices are no different from Xbox, PlayStation, Switch, Roku, Cable Boxes, Keurig, Vzw feature phones. I would be extremely surprised if the courts just up and anti-Tivo’d every device on the planet. You try to make a case about how phones are somehow special but they’re really not. You have millions of people who only have an Xbox and so you can’t reach them unless you contract with MS.
    - 6y ago
pvg 6y ago
The harsher that Apple retaliates, the better Epic's court case. Apple is playing right into his hands. I keep seeing seeing assessments in this vein but they can't really be right - the courts would have to be toddler-level naive not to see through it. They aren't - here's Judge Rogers addressing Epic at the recent hearing (as reported by Sarah Jeong): "To Epic: Your client created this situation. Your client does not come to this action with clean hands ..... in my view, you cannot have irreparable harm when you create the harm yourself."
- philplckthun 6y ago
  Just some thoughts; I actually found this phrasing really interesting, because clearly “you cannot have irreparable harm when you create the harm yourself” is provably incorrect. The judge won’t let this influence the decision on not extending the injunction to the Epic Games contract with Apple because of an earlier point, which is that two separate contracts exist. It’s interesting that this has been addressed with this flimsy follow-up argument. Obviously the court shouldn’t let this influence their decision because it was a calculated move, and it’s assumed that Epic is fine with the harm it causes them to make a point. Nonetheless it’s causing them financial harm, which may in the long term be irreparable if in the meantime their player base on iOS shifts to different games. So all in all, it is a calculated risk but irreparable harm is indeed one possible outcome. Whether Apple takes any responsibility in this depends on how the court decides in the case however. Even if their behaviour is judged as uncompetitive, that may not automatically mean that they’re at all at fault here.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - hannasanarion 6y ago
    The judge is using "irreparable harm" as a term of art. What he's saying is you cannot have standing to sue for irreparable harm that you inflicted on yourself. You can't deliberately crash your own car and then go to court demanding the manufacturer give you a whole new one because the crash revealed a loose screw.
eanzenberg 6y ago
Interesting how every big dog is attacking Apple as they continue to be the lone-wolf in enabling privacy and a secure platform for their users. Apple users are mostly computer illiterate because its Apple’s mission statement to enable computing for everyone. Because of their ease of use, they are now targeted to open up their platform in ways that will jeopardize both their increasing user-privacy and user-security.
- mcdevilkiller 6y ago
  Non-Apple users are also mostly computer illiterate, though.
dmix 6y ago
> The harsher that Apple retaliates, the better Epic's court case. Apple is playing right into his hands. Courts almost never evaluate specific cases based on broader patterns of behaviour... they are always narrowly focused on specific issues. This might help in the media/social media debate, but I doubt it helps much in court. The bigger piece Epic bites off the harder their battle will be.
- _qulr 6y ago
  But the specific issue in this case is whether Apple is an abusive monopolist. Apple is proving that they are.
Razengan 6y ago
> The harsher that Apple retaliates, the better Epic's court case. Apple is playing right into his hands. Meanwhile, https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/24/apple-stock-500/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/24/apple-stock-500/ Unity is also making a play on this, portraying the Unreal Engine as an unreliable choice because of Epic's erratic actions, and in their court filing Epic themselves complained about people leaving them in droves. (Incidentally, when I try to Google "Epic says people leaving in droves" all the results are about millennials leaving cities.)
- DangitBobby 6y ago
  How are Apple's stock prices relevant?
0BEY 6y ago
Even if Epic doesn't "win" this, I just hope that this whole debacle results in an overall improvement of market practices in general down the road, including Google Play and console stores. Ideally, the sooner people realize and escape from Apple's tyranny the better.
antishill 6y ago
Disagree. Epic's battle against Apple seems to based on ulterior motives. They agreed to the App Store terms of service after all. If Epic were to win it would set a terrible precedent whereby contractually requiring payment is unenforceable.
throwaway936482 6y ago
^^^this. Apple appear to be determined to prove that they are monopolists who will use their monopoly power to screw over devs. While apple probably could have got away with suspending just epics developing account and definitely could have got away with just suspending fortnite, attempting to cripple all devs who use unreal to create their games and other products was an idiotic idea, and a textbook example of abusive monopolistic practices. Also epic, because of fortnites success, are absolutely swimming in money and have other revenu streams on desktop and console that that they can survive and prosper on. They're also tapping into an increasing resentment amongst devs, but also political actors about the amount of power apple et al wield.
pier25 6y ago
I agree. I think Epic doesn't care much about losing iOS and MacOS. Epic wants to bring public attention to the issue and reiterate the idea that Apple is against the gamer community but Epic is fighting for them. In either case Epic wins. They wouldn't have gotten into this otherwise.
wrsh07 6y ago
I agree, and while I don't think there's a great chance Epic wins in court, I think now is a great time for them to highlight Apple's deeply unethical practices around the app store: they are both stifling innovation (in what an app store can do or be, see Microsoft x cloud, but also see how long it took Apple to develop subscription payments) and pocketing money they really haven't done anything to earn (rent seeking) Ultimately, I think lawmakers are going to have to be the ones to address this, and it's disappointing they don't seem particularly interested in investigating Apple's app store practices

by _qulr 6y ago

pier25 6y ago

> I don't think Epic ever intended to release the new Fortnite season on Apple platforms. Epic probably doesn't care much about Apple platforms. 80% of Fortnite players are on console. I doubt macOS accounts for more than 1-2%. https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoos-battle-royale-sentiment-study-understanding-the-phenomena-and-what-draws-players-to-particular-franchises/ https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoos-battle-royale-s...

jeremyjh 6y ago
Sure but a fair few play on iOS. If Apple user revenue didn't matter to Epic why would they have even started this to begin with?
- 6nf 6y ago
  To serve as a warning to others
- ragona 6y ago
  I wonder what percentage play exclusively on iOS though. If big spenders will spend on whatever is convenient it could be easily worth it to stop them from spending on iOS and get the cut back.
- beached_whale 6y ago
  There are other App/Game stores. I think this is the first, but XBox/PS maybe in the future.
- snuxoll 6y ago
  For the same reason they’ve pushed Epic Games Store on PC - they take 5% of gross revenue as royalties for any product that uses UE4 and lower fees charged by distribution channels makes that easier to swallow for both larger and smaller studios. Mind you, this is pure speculation on my part - but given they consider that 5% royalty paid as part of the fee for every title sold on EGS it seems likely that their goal is to sell more licenses, not just to cash in on Fortnite.
nacs 6y ago
You're completely ignoring iOS. Fortnite has been in the top 5 top-grossing games on iOS for over a year now making insane amounts via IAPs.
burlesona 6y ago
And ironically Epic is mum on all those consoles that take the exact same cut that Apple does. The iPhone is merely another console. Really hard for me to see why this is controversial, or why Epic thinks that Apple can have a monopoly over their console while somehow Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo don’t...
- takeda 6y ago
  Maybe they chose the smallest market to fight this and set a new precedent?
- kmeisthax 6y ago
  There's two possibilities. 1. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo have all negotiated smaller rev-share agreements with Epic. Maybe this is in exchange for marketing or console bundles or something else that improves the health of the platform. 2. Epic thinks they can use any victory they get out of Apple to force game console manufacturers to do the same thing. Personally, I think it's the latter - Epic's ultimate goal is to get their hands into the game distribution pie. One of the things Epic contemplates in the lawsuit is "we want to run our own iOS app store in competition with Apple's App Store". You bet their ass "Epic Game Store on Switch" is going to follow if they win the Apple lawsuit. (For the record, I happen to want Epic to win, though I don't want EPIC to win. I hate locked-down hardware.) You are correct in one critical way: there's no way in hell Epic would try this shit with console manufacturers. You know how Apple tried to threaten developer tools access and basically tried to take UE4 users hostage? Yeah, imagine that, except console manufacturers have far more leverage. First, console is Epic's core business; second, console developer access is very strictly guarded. Had the courts not enjoined Apple from revoking Epic's UE4 developer account, they could at least have hypothetically continued to support iOS customers. This isn't true on console: the developer tools are confidential and highly guarded. So, instead of "we might revoke your dev account access", it's "give us back our devkits, delete all your copies of our SDK, delete any UE4 code that uses that SDK, and stop selling UE4 on our platform". Epic wouldn't be allowed to support PS4/Switch/Xbox developers in any capacity. Just the mere act of a licensed console developer asking an unlicensed engine provider for support with the console SDK would constitute a breach of their confidentiality agreements.
cavanasm 6y ago
In court, Apple claimed that iOS payments are 12% of total Fortnite revenue, just for reference. It's not a death blow, but it's definitely impactful.
- pier25 6y ago
  How can Apple know the total Fortnite revenue? Is this public knowledge?
  - cavanasm 6y ago
    As far as I'm aware, it isn't, but it could have been part of the filings for the temporary restraining order. The number is from this coverage of the hearing by a tech/legal reporter. https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/1298031302357082112?s=19 https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/1298031302357082112?s=...

sillysaurusx 6y ago

Could you provide any info showing that Apple was definitely going to block all unreal engine powered iOS apps from the App Store? Ideally definitive evidence.

neurostimulant 6y ago
Well, how could Epic continue developing unreal engine for iOS without a developer account?
- lights0123 6y ago
  > Apple originally wanted to terminate the developer accounts of both Epic Games and Epic International, a separate account linked to Epic's Unreal Engine used by third-party app developers, but a judge issued a temporary restraining order preventing Apple from doing so.
  - neurostimulant 6y ago
    But this it just a temporary restraining order, right? Not final yet? Epic's future on apple ecosystem is not clear yet.
- m4rtink 6y ago
  >Well, how could Epic continue developing unreal engine for iOS without a developer account? I thinl this nicely sumariges whats wrong - why the hell should one need an account somewhere to develop software for an OS! Thats a totally arbitrary limitation and as nicely illustrated by Apple - very very dangerous.
  - JiNCMG 6y ago
    You need an account to develop for Xbox, Sony and Switch.
    - DangitBobby 6y ago

cepp 6y ago

> In the short term, Epic loses money by not having Fortnite on Apple devices. Will they though? For all the players who already had the app they still have access to Epic's payment system meaning they're making 20% more on those transactions. I'm not sure that new user purchases will be > 20% they make in the short term from those existing users.

pedroma 6y ago
What are they going to buy? All the new content is on the other platforms.
- an_opabinia 6y ago
  So the court case will wind up being a moot point. This is a technology forum, so speaking of technology... maybe there will just be some radical streaming or delivery innovation, compatible with Mobile Safari today, that could really change the state of at least games and movies on iOS. I wonder why that hasn't happened sooner.
bdcravens 6y ago
They have the app as long as they don't have to reinstall it (new or replacement phone)
- metiscus 6y ago
  Perhaps that works for epic as well, giving apple customers an incentive to move to a platform that allows side loading?
  - thinkloop 6y ago
    Nobody sideloads, especially not kids
    - CydeWeys 6y ago
      Kids are technologically clever, and so long as one of them figures it out it's gonna virally spread to the rest of them. That's certainly how it was for me in school. So, I suspect that lots of people are going to be sideloading in the very near future.

kmonsen 6y ago

I am wondering how much Apple/iOS would be harmed by Unreal Engine goes away. Are they much better than the alternatives? I don't know.

JiNCMG 6y ago
They won't all the big companies release FPS on iOS are using their own engine (EA, Activision, etc). Using Unreal Engine for a casual mobile game is like buying a Ferrari to get some groceries 2 blocks away.
- juskrey 6y ago
  They all use Unreal engine

mattmanser 6y ago

I can't see how Epic wins this. If Stripe can claim Wells Fargo doesn't want to process porn payments, and that's legal, how can an American court rule for Epic? Epic are obviously going to lose, and lose hard, or set a precedent that's going to screw every payment provider in America and open a flood gate for fraudulent payments. You can't force someone to sell something they don't want to, especially because Apple is nowhere near a monopoly in games or gaming sales, they can just point at steam. If somehow the American courts arrive at that judgement, and I am a non-lawyer, I put my hands up, but surely it's going to set all sorts of nasty precedents? Edit: The more I think about it the more absurd this is. It's as if some random brand of Mayo is suing Wallmart for not stocking their brand on their shelves. There is absolutely no way they can win this, unless American courts are going to start allowing "mom & pop" random ketchup brand to force Wallmart to stock it on their shelves. Apple doesn't have a monopoly on phones, it doesn't have a monopoly on games, it's got a store front you can buy stuff from, and if you don't want to play by their rules, then bye-bye. Wallmart choose their suppliers, and sets the markup, why can't Apple?

_qulr 6y ago
The iPhone is not a store. The App Store is a store. Epic wants to be on the iPhone, but not necessarily in the App Store. Ideally, Epic wants to run its own store on the iPhone. In any case, App Store is the only store in town, where the "town" is the 1.5 billion iOS users. If there's only 1 store, with no competing stores, that's an entirely different situation legally.
- Spivak 6y ago
  Apple will do just fine arguing that their devices are no different from Xbox, PlayStation, Switch, Roku, Cable Boxes, Keurig, Vzw feature phones. I would be extremely surprised if the courts just up and anti-Tivo’d every device on the planet. You try to make a case about how phones are somehow special but they’re really not. You have millions of people who only have an Xbox and so you can’t reach them unless you contract with MS.
  - 6y ago

pvg 6y ago

The harsher that Apple retaliates, the better Epic's court case. Apple is playing right into his hands. I keep seeing seeing assessments in this vein but they can't really be right - the courts would have to be toddler-level naive not to see through it. They aren't - here's Judge Rogers addressing Epic at the recent hearing (as reported by Sarah Jeong): "To Epic: Your client created this situation. Your client does not come to this action with clean hands ..... in my view, you cannot have irreparable harm when you create the harm yourself."

philplckthun 6y ago
Just some thoughts; I actually found this phrasing really interesting, because clearly “you cannot have irreparable harm when you create the harm yourself” is provably incorrect. The judge won’t let this influence the decision on not extending the injunction to the Epic Games contract with Apple because of an earlier point, which is that two separate contracts exist. It’s interesting that this has been addressed with this flimsy follow-up argument. Obviously the court shouldn’t let this influence their decision because it was a calculated move, and it’s assumed that Epic is fine with the harm it causes them to make a point. Nonetheless it’s causing them financial harm, which may in the long term be irreparable if in the meantime their player base on iOS shifts to different games. So all in all, it is a calculated risk but irreparable harm is indeed one possible outcome. Whether Apple takes any responsibility in this depends on how the court decides in the case however. Even if their behaviour is judged as uncompetitive, that may not automatically mean that they’re at all at fault here.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- hannasanarion 6y ago
  The judge is using "irreparable harm" as a term of art. What he's saying is you cannot have standing to sue for irreparable harm that you inflicted on yourself. You can't deliberately crash your own car and then go to court demanding the manufacturer give you a whole new one because the crash revealed a loose screw.

eanzenberg 6y ago

Interesting how every big dog is attacking Apple as they continue to be the lone-wolf in enabling privacy and a secure platform for their users. Apple users are mostly computer illiterate because its Apple’s mission statement to enable computing for everyone. Because of their ease of use, they are now targeted to open up their platform in ways that will jeopardize both their increasing user-privacy and user-security.

mcdevilkiller 6y ago
Non-Apple users are also mostly computer illiterate, though.

dmix 6y ago

> The harsher that Apple retaliates, the better Epic's court case. Apple is playing right into his hands. Courts almost never evaluate specific cases based on broader patterns of behaviour... they are always narrowly focused on specific issues. This might help in the media/social media debate, but I doubt it helps much in court. The bigger piece Epic bites off the harder their battle will be.

_qulr 6y ago
But the specific issue in this case is whether Apple is an abusive monopolist. Apple is proving that they are.

Razengan 6y ago

> The harsher that Apple retaliates, the better Epic's court case. Apple is playing right into his hands. Meanwhile, https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/24/apple-stock-500/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/24/apple-stock-500/ Unity is also making a play on this, portraying the Unreal Engine as an unreliable choice because of Epic's erratic actions, and in their court filing Epic themselves complained about people leaving them in droves. (Incidentally, when I try to Google "Epic says people leaving in droves" all the results are about millennials leaving cities.)

DangitBobby 6y ago
How are Apple's stock prices relevant?

0BEY 6y ago

Even if Epic doesn't "win" this, I just hope that this whole debacle results in an overall improvement of market practices in general down the road, including Google Play and console stores. Ideally, the sooner people realize and escape from Apple's tyranny the better.

antishill 6y ago

Disagree. Epic's battle against Apple seems to based on ulterior motives. They agreed to the App Store terms of service after all. If Epic were to win it would set a terrible precedent whereby contractually requiring payment is unenforceable.

throwaway936482 6y ago

^^^this. Apple appear to be determined to prove that they are monopolists who will use their monopoly power to screw over devs. While apple probably could have got away with suspending just epics developing account and definitely could have got away with just suspending fortnite, attempting to cripple all devs who use unreal to create their games and other products was an idiotic idea, and a textbook example of abusive monopolistic practices. Also epic, because of fortnites success, are absolutely swimming in money and have other revenu streams on desktop and console that that they can survive and prosper on. They're also tapping into an increasing resentment amongst devs, but also political actors about the amount of power apple et al wield.

pier25 6y ago

I agree. I think Epic doesn't care much about losing iOS and MacOS. Epic wants to bring public attention to the issue and reiterate the idea that Apple is against the gamer community but Epic is fighting for them. In either case Epic wins. They wouldn't have gotten into this otherwise.

wrsh07 6y ago

I agree, and while I don't think there's a great chance Epic wins in court, I think now is a great time for them to highlight Apple's deeply unethical practices around the app store: they are both stifling innovation (in what an app store can do or be, see Microsoft x cloud, but also see how long it took Apple to develop subscription payments) and pocketing money they really haven't done anything to earn (rent seeking) Ultimately, I think lawmakers are going to have to be the ones to address this, and it's disappointing they don't seem particularly interested in investigating Apple's app store practices