3 ms·
It does reveal that Epic doesn't have a "public interest" defense in the sense of getting their game back in consumers' hands, and a public interest defense is
by dundarious 6y ago
It does reveal that Epic doesn't have a "public interest" defense in the sense of getting their game back in consumers' hands, and a public interest defense is listed as a requirement for preliminary injunctive relief.
Is your point that Epic could/did argue that they need relief because escrow via Apple's payment systems provides no benefit to customers who want to use an alternative payment system?
I'm no expert but it would seem odd to grant "relief" that alters the status quo. That's granting automatic improvement over the original terms Epic signed up to.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> It does reveal that Epic doesn't have a "public interest" defense in the sense of getting their game back in consumers' hands No, it doesn't. The public interest factor in injunctions is unrelated to defenses (and defenses aren't really something the plaintiff needs to have, generally.) > and a public interest defense is listed as a requirement for preliminary injunctive relief. No, the public interest must favor the injunction; this is aside from considering any defenses applicable to the causes of action in the case.
- dundarious 6y agoI have no legal training, but it seems the word "defense" may have a specific meaning, and you take issue with my inappropriate usage of the word. But if you remove the word "defense" from my post, I don't understand what it is you are disputing, or if there is any remaining dispute. So for example, imagine I had said the following: Epic doesn't seem to be able to establish an injunction is in the "public interest" in the sense of getting their game back in consumers' hands.
- banachtarski 6y agoYou do not fundamentally understand the argument, which is that a freer market with the ability to charge for and ship software outside of the app store (like is done on Windows/Mac) would be better for consumers.
- dundarious 6y agoI don't necessarily disagree when it comes to what the final outcome should be. But I'm specifically talking about the preliminary injunctive relief, not the final judgment to come. The court can't grant preliminary relief that forces Apple to provide a means to install apps from outside the App Store.