4 ms·

The problem with this logic, is that Apple isn't really a "business" in this case. Epic and Apple aren't really "business partners". Apple is an unregulated pri

The problem with this logic, is that Apple isn't really a "business" in this case. Epic and Apple aren't really "business partners". Apple is an unregulated privately-owned quasi-government entity with none of the responsibilities or checks on authority that a real government has. You can sue the Post Office, lose your case, and know they can't retaliate by stealing all your mail forever. You can sue the Department of Labour, lose a case, and still have the right to hire employees in the future. You can sue the Fire Department, lose a case, and still reasonably trust they won't burn down your house. You can sue your local Power Company, lose your case, and still trust that they can't unilaterally ban you from ever buying Electricity again. But you can't ever sue Apple, over anything, ever, no matter how evil Apple is, no matter how heinous Apple's activity may be. Because no matter how valid or correct your complain is, no matter what happens, they'll just black-bag your entire digital existence in retaliation. Apple is acting like a Government, Apple is ruling like a Government, but Apple has none of the oversight or accountability we'd demand from any reasonable Government. Folks are thinking of Apple like it's just a video game console, when the more apt comparison is Comcast or AT&T. Apple shouldn't be allowed to control what does or does not live in the App Store, for the same reason that Comcast shouldn't even be allowed to decide what websites or services you do/don't use.

Razengan 5y ago
> Apple is an unregulated privately-owned quasi-government entity JFC Apple allows 3rd-party shit on Macs. The App Store is a store, just like Google Play and Steam etc. And iPhones and iPads are a platform, just like the PlayStation, Xbox, or Nintendo Switch etc. Show us one instance where someone violated the T&C of any other store or platform and were still allowed to continue to do business there.
- maxsilver 5y ago
  > iPhones and iPads are a platform, just like the PlayStation, Xbox, or Nintendo Switch etc. Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point. : Folks are thinking of Apple like it's just a video game console, when the more apt comparison is Comcast or AT&T.
  - UnpossibleJim 5y ago
    Even if you think of it as a gaming platform (which it isn't)... there's Nintendo, Playstation, Xbox, PC, Mac, Steam (also on PC and Mac, but separate to itself)... I might have missed some niche platforms. As opposed to mobile, which is Apple and Android.
- vibrato2 5y ago
  United States federal interstate system
abduhl 5y ago
>> Apple is acting like a Government, Apple is ruling like a Government, but Apple has none of the oversight or accountability we'd demand from any reasonable Government. You just listed how Apple is not acting like a government: they’re retaliating. I don’t understand how you can say “Apple’s retaliatory and discriminatory practices in choosing who to do business with is the touchstone of government” at the same time you list four perfectly good examples of a government entity not being able to do exactly what you say is the touchstone of a government. You’re wrong. Apple is a private company. Doing business with people you want to do business with, and not doing business with people you don’t want to do business with (barring certain discriminatory practices), is literally what distinguishes private companies from government entities. If you want to argue that the App Store or iPhones or iMacs or MacBooks are somehow critical public infrastructure that should be governed by, apparently, common carrier laws then you should do that directly.
- Jensson 5y ago
  > You just listed how Apple is not acting like a government: they’re retaliating. Responsible governments doesn't retaliate, oppressive governments tend to retaliate a lot. So you are right, Apple isn't acting like a responsible government, but the argument was that it is acting like an oppressive one.
  - abduhl 5y ago
    Somehow acting like Not-X makes you X? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, is organized under state laws explicitly as a duck, and sits on top of the water like a duck, it’s an eagle?
    - Jensson 5y ago
      No, the argument isn't "Apple is like a government since Apple is retaliating". The argument is "Apple is like a government and therefore shouldn't be allowed to retaliate". And no, saying "They are retaliating and therefore not a government" is not a good defence to the argument "Apple is like a government and therefore shouldn't be allowed to retaliate".
_fat_santa 5y ago
> The problem with this logic, is that Apple isn't really a "business" in this case. Epic and Apple aren't really "business partners". Apple is an unregulated privately-owned quasi-government entity with none of the responsibilities or checks on authority that a real government has. Are there any parallels in history we can point to for stuff like this? Maybe Standard Oil? I've been thinking alot about these massive companies lately, they are so massive and so intertwined in our society that maybe we should consider a new class of laws and regulations for these companies. I think we should have a new class of laws and regulation called "for the common good" or something like that, and apply it to companies that have more than say 100M users. The libertarian in me hates this, but I think we also have to consider that these companies are larger and more influential then we ever though possible.
judge2020 5y ago
Your post would hold up if the court didn’t already decide that Apple is not, in fact, a monopoly. The market in the lawsuit was defined as “digital mobile game transactions” https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/09/10/epic-v-apple.pdf https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/09/10/epic-v-apple.pdf
- kllrnohj 5y ago
  The court made that decision under the existing legal framework. That does not mean, nor even imply, that the existing legal framework is fair & just nor that it has kept up with modern structures.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    This is because courts in the U.S. tend to not try to 'legislate from the bench' - if you want laws changed you have to get legislators to do it, a lawsuit won't.
- eldaisfish 5y ago
  the court then has a limited understanding of what a fine line they are walking, both in legal and practical terms. Many laws and tests - especially the one used to determine monopolistic practices - are horribly outdated and based on ideas and assumptions from before the internet age. That the court failed to see how an app store where an unregulated corporation makes rules without oversight, repercussions or much legal precents - is indeed skirting the line of what constitutes a monopoly is tragic. Take a look at that judgement - not a single example exists there for digital monopolies. The insidious part of a digital monopoly - as already pointed out - is that there is no precedent and apple are now the digital equivalent of highwaymen. Expect this to happen more often to the point where these laws and tests are updated for the modern age. One that i foresee is Amazon and their Basics line of products.
judge2020 5y ago
> for the same reason that Comcast shouldn't even be allowed to decide what websites or services you do/don't use. Internet is not regulated like this. ISPs can and do ban you for torrenting or going to certain websites because they're not a general utility.
weixiyen 5y ago
I agree with this, Epic is forcing Apple into a no-win situation where they either do what Epic wants or come off very poorly to regulators. Epic doesn't need to win this specific court case to get what they want, all they need is for this to stay top of mind for lawmakers to change the rules in favor of developers.
sneak 5y ago
This is patently false. Apple cannot "black-bag your entire digital existence". Just stop using Apple devices. They're not the government.

Razengan 5y ago

> Apple is an unregulated privately-owned quasi-government entity JFC Apple allows 3rd-party shit on Macs. The App Store is a store, just like Google Play and Steam etc. And iPhones and iPads are a platform, just like the PlayStation, Xbox, or Nintendo Switch etc. Show us one instance where someone violated the T&C of any other store or platform and were still allowed to continue to do business there.

maxsilver 5y ago
> iPhones and iPads are a platform, just like the PlayStation, Xbox, or Nintendo Switch etc. Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point. : Folks are thinking of Apple like it's just a video game console, when the more apt comparison is Comcast or AT&T.
- UnpossibleJim 5y ago
  Even if you think of it as a gaming platform (which it isn't)... there's Nintendo, Playstation, Xbox, PC, Mac, Steam (also on PC and Mac, but separate to itself)... I might have missed some niche platforms. As opposed to mobile, which is Apple and Android.
vibrato2 5y ago
United States federal interstate system

abduhl 5y ago

>> Apple is acting like a Government, Apple is ruling like a Government, but Apple has none of the oversight or accountability we'd demand from any reasonable Government. You just listed how Apple is not acting like a government: they’re retaliating. I don’t understand how you can say “Apple’s retaliatory and discriminatory practices in choosing who to do business with is the touchstone of government” at the same time you list four perfectly good examples of a government entity not being able to do exactly what you say is the touchstone of a government. You’re wrong. Apple is a private company. Doing business with people you want to do business with, and not doing business with people you don’t want to do business with (barring certain discriminatory practices), is literally what distinguishes private companies from government entities. If you want to argue that the App Store or iPhones or iMacs or MacBooks are somehow critical public infrastructure that should be governed by, apparently, common carrier laws then you should do that directly.

Jensson 5y ago
> You just listed how Apple is not acting like a government: they’re retaliating. Responsible governments doesn't retaliate, oppressive governments tend to retaliate a lot. So you are right, Apple isn't acting like a responsible government, but the argument was that it is acting like an oppressive one.
- abduhl 5y ago
  Somehow acting like Not-X makes you X? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, is organized under state laws explicitly as a duck, and sits on top of the water like a duck, it’s an eagle?
  - Jensson 5y ago
    No, the argument isn't "Apple is like a government since Apple is retaliating". The argument is "Apple is like a government and therefore shouldn't be allowed to retaliate". And no, saying "They are retaliating and therefore not a government" is not a good defence to the argument "Apple is like a government and therefore shouldn't be allowed to retaliate".

_fat_santa 5y ago

> The problem with this logic, is that Apple isn't really a "business" in this case. Epic and Apple aren't really "business partners". Apple is an unregulated privately-owned quasi-government entity with none of the responsibilities or checks on authority that a real government has. Are there any parallels in history we can point to for stuff like this? Maybe Standard Oil? I've been thinking alot about these massive companies lately, they are so massive and so intertwined in our society that maybe we should consider a new class of laws and regulations for these companies. I think we should have a new class of laws and regulation called "for the common good" or something like that, and apply it to companies that have more than say 100M users. The libertarian in me hates this, but I think we also have to consider that these companies are larger and more influential then we ever though possible.

judge2020 5y ago

Your post would hold up if the court didn’t already decide that Apple is not, in fact, a monopoly. The market in the lawsuit was defined as “digital mobile game transactions” https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/09/10/epic-v-apple.pdf https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/09/10/epic-v-apple.pdf

kllrnohj 5y ago
The court made that decision under the existing legal framework. That does not mean, nor even imply, that the existing legal framework is fair & just nor that it has kept up with modern structures.
- judge2020 5y ago
  This is because courts in the U.S. tend to not try to 'legislate from the bench' - if you want laws changed you have to get legislators to do it, a lawsuit won't.
eldaisfish 5y ago
the court then has a limited understanding of what a fine line they are walking, both in legal and practical terms. Many laws and tests - especially the one used to determine monopolistic practices - are horribly outdated and based on ideas and assumptions from before the internet age. That the court failed to see how an app store where an unregulated corporation makes rules without oversight, repercussions or much legal precents - is indeed skirting the line of what constitutes a monopoly is tragic. Take a look at that judgement - not a single example exists there for digital monopolies. The insidious part of a digital monopoly - as already pointed out - is that there is no precedent and apple are now the digital equivalent of highwaymen. Expect this to happen more often to the point where these laws and tests are updated for the modern age. One that i foresee is Amazon and their Basics line of products.

judge2020 5y ago

> for the same reason that Comcast shouldn't even be allowed to decide what websites or services you do/don't use. Internet is not regulated like this. ISPs can and do ban you for torrenting or going to certain websites because they're not a general utility.

weixiyen 5y ago

I agree with this, Epic is forcing Apple into a no-win situation where they either do what Epic wants or come off very poorly to regulators. Epic doesn't need to win this specific court case to get what they want, all they need is for this to stay top of mind for lawmakers to change the rules in favor of developers.

sneak 5y ago

This is patently false. Apple cannot "black-bag your entire digital existence". Just stop using Apple devices. They're not the government.