4 ms·

I really hope this will damage Apple’s brand and platform... They enforce their TOS randomly and this will happen to smaller companies too. Hurts the consumer

by Jaxkr 6y ago

I really hope this will damage Apple’s brand and platform... They enforce their TOS randomly and this will happen to smaller companies too. Hurts the consumer too. People will be locked out of their Epic accounts.

nemothekid 6y ago
>I really hope this will damage Apple’s brand and platform... They enforce their TOS randomly and this will happen to smaller companies too. Epic's own customers are blaming Epic for this snafu. It's hard to see Apple as the bad guy when Epic is the one who broke the rules first. Almost every gamer isn't going to be sympathetic to a player who broke the rules and got banned.
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  If rules are illegal then breaking them to challenge them in court seems justified
  - Spivak 6y ago
    Absolutely, but I'm surprised to see so many people think that civil disobedience is a consequence free act. The whole point is that you break the law and then visibly suffer the consequences to get attention.
mythz 6y ago
This wasn't some random ToS violation, this was a willful egregious violation done with subversion & malice to undermine the App Store's revenue model. I don't fault Apple for wanting to sever all ties with bad actors. > They enforce their TOS randomly and this will happen to smaller companies too. If their ToS is randomly enforced, which other App/Company violated the same terms as Epic which Apple chose to not enforce? I can't imagine there'll ever be a single case where a remote activated violation to sneak pass App Review would ever be allowed to remain on the App Store once identified.
- cochne 6y ago
  Don't "premium video companies" like Netflix and Amazon get a special deal? https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-video-ios-in-app-purchases-iphone-ipad-apple-tv-change https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-vide...
  - mythz 6y ago
    There's no "special deal" for large companies because of who they are, there are multiple exemptions [1] for which types of Apps are free, what sales are exempt and which are subject to Royalty, e.g. "Reader" Apps like Kindle, Audible, Netflix & Spotify don't pay any Royalty. They have been relaxing the categories of Apps which are exempt as previously Spotify & Netflix were subject to the 30% Royalty. [1] https://www.apple.com/ios/app-store/principles-practices/#:~:text=These%20are%20apps%20where%20users%20exclusively https://www.apple.com/ios/app-store/principles-practices/#:~...
- will4274 6y ago
  Amazon doesn't pay the 30% fee and violates the same terms by providing alternative payment providers in app. It's just that Apple is too scared to de-platform Amazon. Remote activation is an irrelevant detail. Apps routinely active features remotely. It's the underlying violation that matters, not how it was enabled. That's just PR.

by Jaxkr 6y ago

nemothekid 6y ago

>I really hope this will damage Apple’s brand and platform... They enforce their TOS randomly and this will happen to smaller companies too. Epic's own customers are blaming Epic for this snafu. It's hard to see Apple as the bad guy when Epic is the one who broke the rules first. Almost every gamer isn't going to be sympathetic to a player who broke the rules and got banned.

paulryanrogers 6y ago
If rules are illegal then breaking them to challenge them in court seems justified
- Spivak 6y ago
  Absolutely, but I'm surprised to see so many people think that civil disobedience is a consequence free act. The whole point is that you break the law and then visibly suffer the consequences to get attention.

mythz 6y ago

This wasn't some random ToS violation, this was a willful egregious violation done with subversion & malice to undermine the App Store's revenue model. I don't fault Apple for wanting to sever all ties with bad actors. > They enforce their TOS randomly and this will happen to smaller companies too. If their ToS is randomly enforced, which other App/Company violated the same terms as Epic which Apple chose to not enforce? I can't imagine there'll ever be a single case where a remote activated violation to sneak pass App Review would ever be allowed to remain on the App Store once identified.

cochne 6y ago
Don't "premium video companies" like Netflix and Amazon get a special deal? https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-video-ios-in-app-purchases-iphone-ipad-apple-tv-change https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-vide...
- mythz 6y ago
  There's no "special deal" for large companies because of who they are, there are multiple exemptions [1] for which types of Apps are free, what sales are exempt and which are subject to Royalty, e.g. "Reader" Apps like Kindle, Audible, Netflix & Spotify don't pay any Royalty. They have been relaxing the categories of Apps which are exempt as previously Spotify & Netflix were subject to the 30% Royalty. [1] https://www.apple.com/ios/app-store/principles-practices/#:~:text=These%20are%20apps%20where%20users%20exclusively https://www.apple.com/ios/app-store/principles-practices/#:~...
will4274 6y ago
Amazon doesn't pay the 30% fee and violates the same terms by providing alternative payment providers in app. It's just that Apple is too scared to de-platform Amazon. Remote activation is an irrelevant detail. Apps routinely active features remotely. It's the underlying violation that matters, not how it was enabled. That's just PR.