17 ms·

If I had a Customer that spent years relentlessly complaining about my Company, I know I wouldn't want to have them as a Customer. It does present an interesti

If I had a Customer that spent years relentlessly complaining about my Company, I know I wouldn't want to have them as a Customer. It does present an interesting question on whether a Company can be forced to have a bad actor as a Customer, I guess this will be decided in the lawsuits to come.

archagon 3y ago
If your company has a market segment captured, you should not have any right to do that, irrespective of your feelings.
ajross 3y ago
App vendors aren't customers. They don't pay Apple anything more than the license fees for Xcode. The app's users are the customers, and if you start throwing out the partners you lose customers. Now, sure, the calculus might change depending on your relationship with each partner, but you absolutely cant say that Epic doesn't bring revenue to Apple. They do.
ginko 3y ago
Epic isn't apple's customer. They just use their tools.
andersa 3y ago
Your company is likely not considered a core platform service, so your analogy is not relevant.
_fat_santa 3y ago
The key difference I see in Apple's app store business is that it's a monopolistic marketplace model. If Apple allowed an alternative to the app store then this wouldn't be an issue. Take Microsoft and Windows as an example, they have the Microsoft store which operates as a marketplace with rules but they don't get the same scrutiny because there are alternatives. Don't like what MS is doing with their app store? Fine just release the binary yourself. With Apple though, the bring it on themselves by having a monopolistic marketplace. Since they are the sole gatekeeper to getting apps on the iDevices, there is no alternative like there is in the MS ecosystem. Apple could end all scrutiny tomorrow if they allowed a way to install apps on iDevices that bypassed the app store and Epic would have no case.
- askonomm 3y ago
  But as of iOS 17.4 they do allow alternative app stores in EU.
  - whazor 3y ago
    No, you need an Apple developer account to set up an alternative marketplace.
  - lozenge 3y ago
    You still need a developer account to notarise apps that are published on alternative app stores. Plus you need to agree to pay Apple the Core Technology Fee.
    - codingcodingboy 3y ago
      Why didn't the EU force the removal of those requirements? Apple will keep playing games to make alternative stores uncompetitive and keep away unwanted developers.
      - Jensson 3y ago
        I think 8 was intended to stop that sort of thing, but maybe Apple thinks it doesn't apply? 8. The gatekeeper shall not require business users or end users to subscribe to, or register with, any further core platform services, as a condition for being able to use, access, sign up for or registering with any of that gatekeeper’s core platform services listed pursuant to that Article.
        codingcodingboy 3y ago
        You are probably right, and now I wonder if this doesn't also apply to the standard Apple developer program. I have not read the DMA but in the gatekeeper section of the official website the Core platform services listed are AppStore, iOS and Safari. Let's suppose that you single out iOs, why should I sign up something about AppStore to develop apps?
lxgr 3y ago
Companies in quite a few industries have a duty to do business with you, with very few limitations. For example, in some countries/cities, taxis generally can't refuse transportation to you, assuming you're able to pay and not endangering the driver. Having publicly and repeatedly expressed a dislike for taxis, or even wearing a t-shirt saying "taxis in $city are an overpriced monopoly" would not be a valid reason to be refused transportation. In the EU/under the DMA, Apple now very likely has a duty to transact even with app developers saying mean things about them. That's certainly a very new situation for Apple, but not an unprecedented one. I'm not sure if throwing more hissy fits and breaking more of their playmates' toys is a good idea now that adults are in the room.
- mckn1ght 3y ago
  Taxis in many cities operate under the authority of a government institution [0], so it makes more sense that they have a duty to do business with the public. Whereas one can often experience waiting for a Lyft/Uber where drivers repeatedly decline service after initially accepting. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxi_medallion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxi_medallion
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    This doesn't really have anything to do with licensing. There are laws that prohibit businesses from e.g. refusing customers on the basis of race or sex and it doesn't matter if you're a restaurant or a hardware store or a flower shop.
    - mckn1ght 3y ago
      That's true, but is there any reason to believe Apple is acting in such a discriminatory fashion against a protected class of citizen?
      - Jensson 3y ago
        This is a different set of laws, different set of protected things that you aren't allowed to discriminate or retaliate against.
kevingadd 3y ago
Criticizing defects in a product or criticizing a vendor's misbehavior doesn't make you automatically a "bad actor". A healthy vendor/customer relationship involves having channels where this criticism can be exchanged without putting the vendor or the customer in a bad position, and the criticism results in a better product. Instead, bug reports go into a black hole because Apple doesn't care, and they especially don't care about game developers, unless those game developers are running casino games or gacha games that bring in a billion dollars a year. Then Apple cares a lot - about 30%. If a billion-dollar company is so thin-skinned that they can't handle having their policies criticized they're run by children. Epic has historically brought in a lot of money for Apple, both directly - via titles like Infinity Blade and Fortnite - and indirectly - by enabling the developer ecosystem so more people can release titles on Apple platforms. In the past Epic helped promote new Apple product launches. Calling them a bad actor is ridiculous.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Criticizing defects in a product or criticizing a vendor's misbehavior doesn't make you automatically a "bad actor" Doing so publicly certainly does. I would terminate business with a client if they started airing out their issues about me on Twitter. That said, I’m not Apple. At a certain size, you lose the right to reject bad actors.
  - kevingadd 3y ago
    Like I said, Apple gives you no other choice. They don't have proper channels for communication on things like software defects or policy. You have to kick up a public outcry to get any help.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Apple gives you no other choice Sweeney and Schiller were emailing. Apple will read a letter you send addressed to their legal team.
  - nottorp 3y ago
the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
In Europe there is the concept of “Forced to contract”. You can be forced to accept a customer. Applies to many monopolies.
- nottorp 3y ago
  Single payer health insurance, for example :)
eviks 3y ago
Why not? There will be more complaints because of your action
015a 3y ago
Epic also doesn't want to be Apple's customer. No one would describe the relationship between Microsoft and Epic as "Epic being Microsoft's customer" because they distribute the Epic Games Store and Fortnite on Windows (Xbox console distribution notwithstanding; there it is more of a customer relationship). Apple forces everyone who wants access to 50% of the mobile computing market into a customer-oriented relationship, and then complains when not everyone Thinks The Same as they do. Its disgusting behavior.
layer8 3y ago
The issue is that Epic doesn’t want to be Apple’s customer in the first place. They want to publish iOS apps. The fact that this requires them to be an Apple customer is the core problem. Imagine if everyone wanting to publish a web app would have to be a customer of the respective browser vendors. Everyone complains about Google and Mozilla and Safari and Edge. Luckily, that doesn’t prevent us from having our web apps running on those browsers.
- lelandfe 3y ago
  Publishing a Chrome browser extension more-or-less requires being a customer of the Chrome Web Store. There are plenty of other examples, folks tend to give Playstation/Xbox/Switch stores in these conversations as well.
  - Phrodo_00 3y ago
    > Publishing a Chrome browser extension more-or-less requires being a customer of the Chrome Web Store Emphasis on more-or-less, though. You can use Chrome developer mode (which is NOT a paid option and doesn't require an account) to import extensions from files. You can't do that in iOS. That's Epic's point.
    - paulmd 3y ago
      you don't need a developer account to sideload an app on ios, and it wouldn't change anything legally if you did (feature tiering is legal) another classic example of android users who don't understand the things they're talking about. go on, tell me more about how "you can't copy and paste between applications in ios" or "there's not even a file browser" please. (now, still not being able to figure out a calculator app on ipad? that's a fair one lol)
      - Zambyte 3y ago
        I didn't believe you so I looked it up, and this[0] is what I found > AltStore then signs the application with your Apple ID so the app can run. You'll need to trust the developer certificate in your device settings, but when you do, any apps that you install through AltStore will work... for seven days. Apple has put several restrictions in place to make the process as difficult as possible, but the developer managed to work around those restrictions. As the clock nears closer to the end of the seven-day period, AltStore will refresh the signing key on the app so that you can get an extra seven days of usage. This can also run in the background. > AltStore makes use of a feature Apple introduced that lets you install *up to three apps* for free using your Apple ID. > However, AltStore relies on a computer on the same network running AltServer, so you'll need both iTunes and iCloud installed on that device. [...] Is this seriously what you're talking about? Because after reading that I still don't believe you can install apps on iOS without Apples splash of iHoly Water TM. [0] https://www.xda-developers.com/how-to-sideload-apps-iphone-altstore/ https://www.xda-developers.com/how-to-sideload-apps-iphone-a...
beeboobaa 3y ago
Then you shouldn't position yourself as a gatekeeper. I also don't want to pay taxes, but have to comply with the law anyway.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
onion2k 3y ago
If I had a Customer that spent years relentlessly complaining about my Company, I know I wouldn't want to have them as a Customer. Epic aren't a customer. They're a supplier. They provide Apple with software that Apple's customers buy. Apple are denying their customers, iPhone users, the option to buy Epic apps through Apple's app store. You should never lose sight of who actually loses here. It's not really Apple or Epic. They're massive corporations that will continue to make billions regardless. The loser is iPhone users who want to use their devices to play a game they enjoy.
yokoprime 3y ago
If someone spends years badmouthing Microsoft, would you say its ok for Microsoft to block their apps from Windows?
johnnyanmac 3y ago
Depends on the ruling and laws. I'm sure someone who didn't allow homosexual couples would not want to welcome them even after it was ruled as unconstitutional to discriminate to them in the US (even if they are middle eastern and laws in their homeland do allow for that). They were technically rowdy customers but the law allows them to be in as long as their rowdiness was due to their identity and not other neutral actions (although we know they will be judged much more harshly on those actions as an attempt to disciminate). A bit of a crude comparison, but I hope it gets the point across that the behavior depends. retaliating against rules that the EU later determines to be bad rules may open a case to allow them, as long as they don't break other rules.
gigel82 3y ago
Epic isn't Apple's customer. Apple is just the local (techno)feudal lord / rentier wanting to tax all merchants trying to sell goods to Apple's serfs.
heisenbit 3y ago
If one stretches ones leverage to the point where it is considered by authorities as excessive and is forced to make concessions one is not in the position to attack those who attacked ones monopolistic behavior. The technical term is is "sitting in a glass house" and while one figures out the layout of the panels one is advised to refrain from throwing rocks. The way I see it Apple is lumping past behavior and current behavior of Epic together to make an exclusion decision. But there was a big change between the past and now so the market situation has changed and access to this changed market should not overly depend on information from a very different world otherwise it can be considered at best arbitrary or an attempt to exclude competitors with irrelevant facts. The latter could get expensive.
overgard 3y ago
Epic is only a customer because Apple's policies forces them to be.
raincole 3y ago
Are you serious? So you think it's okay for Unity to terminate my dev account because I complain about Unity on hacker news? (Replace Unity with Windows, Photoshop or whatever software people constantly complain about.)
Spivak 3y ago
It's not even that, if I was Apple I wouldn't want to have them as a customer simply to deny them standing for their constant lawsuits. If the two companies have absolutely no business relationship at all, ties completely severed then it's a lot harder to demonstrate harm. All you could really sue about is that they won't do business with you. I'm actually surprised it's not SOP to stop doing business with people who sue you after the lawsuit ends. I mean you took the nuclear option.
scotty79 3y ago
Things look a bit different if you are one of two for example electric utility companies in the country. You can't deny someone service just because they said mean thing about you. Companies should be forced to service law abiding customers.

archagon 3y ago

If your company has a market segment captured, you should not have any right to do that, irrespective of your feelings.

ajross 3y ago

App vendors aren't customers. They don't pay Apple anything more than the license fees for Xcode. The app's users are the customers, and if you start throwing out the partners you lose customers. Now, sure, the calculus might change depending on your relationship with each partner, but you absolutely cant say that Epic doesn't bring revenue to Apple. They do.

ginko 3y ago

Epic isn't apple's customer. They just use their tools.

andersa 3y ago

Your company is likely not considered a core platform service, so your analogy is not relevant.

_fat_santa 3y ago

The key difference I see in Apple's app store business is that it's a monopolistic marketplace model. If Apple allowed an alternative to the app store then this wouldn't be an issue. Take Microsoft and Windows as an example, they have the Microsoft store which operates as a marketplace with rules but they don't get the same scrutiny because there are alternatives. Don't like what MS is doing with their app store? Fine just release the binary yourself. With Apple though, the bring it on themselves by having a monopolistic marketplace. Since they are the sole gatekeeper to getting apps on the iDevices, there is no alternative like there is in the MS ecosystem. Apple could end all scrutiny tomorrow if they allowed a way to install apps on iDevices that bypassed the app store and Epic would have no case.

askonomm 3y ago
But as of iOS 17.4 they do allow alternative app stores in EU.
- whazor 3y ago
  No, you need an Apple developer account to set up an alternative marketplace.
- lozenge 3y ago
  You still need a developer account to notarise apps that are published on alternative app stores. Plus you need to agree to pay Apple the Core Technology Fee.
  - codingcodingboy 3y ago
    Why didn't the EU force the removal of those requirements? Apple will keep playing games to make alternative stores uncompetitive and keep away unwanted developers.
    - Jensson 3y ago
      I think 8 was intended to stop that sort of thing, but maybe Apple thinks it doesn't apply? 8. The gatekeeper shall not require business users or end users to subscribe to, or register with, any further core platform services, as a condition for being able to use, access, sign up for or registering with any of that gatekeeper’s core platform services listed pursuant to that Article.
      - codingcodingboy 3y ago
        You are probably right, and now I wonder if this doesn't also apply to the standard Apple developer program. I have not read the DMA but in the gatekeeper section of the official website the Core platform services listed are AppStore, iOS and Safari. Let's suppose that you single out iOs, why should I sign up something about AppStore to develop apps?

lxgr 3y ago

Companies in quite a few industries have a duty to do business with you, with very few limitations. For example, in some countries/cities, taxis generally can't refuse transportation to you, assuming you're able to pay and not endangering the driver. Having publicly and repeatedly expressed a dislike for taxis, or even wearing a t-shirt saying "taxis in $city are an overpriced monopoly" would not be a valid reason to be refused transportation. In the EU/under the DMA, Apple now very likely has a duty to transact even with app developers saying mean things about them. That's certainly a very new situation for Apple, but not an unprecedented one. I'm not sure if throwing more hissy fits and breaking more of their playmates' toys is a good idea now that adults are in the room.

mckn1ght 3y ago
Taxis in many cities operate under the authority of a government institution [0], so it makes more sense that they have a duty to do business with the public. Whereas one can often experience waiting for a Lyft/Uber where drivers repeatedly decline service after initially accepting. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxi_medallion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxi_medallion
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  This doesn't really have anything to do with licensing. There are laws that prohibit businesses from e.g. refusing customers on the basis of race or sex and it doesn't matter if you're a restaurant or a hardware store or a flower shop.
  - mckn1ght 3y ago
    That's true, but is there any reason to believe Apple is acting in such a discriminatory fashion against a protected class of citizen?
    - Jensson 3y ago
      This is a different set of laws, different set of protected things that you aren't allowed to discriminate or retaliate against.

kevingadd 3y ago

Criticizing defects in a product or criticizing a vendor's misbehavior doesn't make you automatically a "bad actor". A healthy vendor/customer relationship involves having channels where this criticism can be exchanged without putting the vendor or the customer in a bad position, and the criticism results in a better product. Instead, bug reports go into a black hole because Apple doesn't care, and they especially don't care about game developers, unless those game developers are running casino games or gacha games that bring in a billion dollars a year. Then Apple cares a lot - about 30%. If a billion-dollar company is so thin-skinned that they can't handle having their policies criticized they're run by children. Epic has historically brought in a lot of money for Apple, both directly - via titles like Infinity Blade and Fortnite - and indirectly - by enabling the developer ecosystem so more people can release titles on Apple platforms. In the past Epic helped promote new Apple product launches. Calling them a bad actor is ridiculous.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Criticizing defects in a product or criticizing a vendor's misbehavior doesn't make you automatically a "bad actor" Doing so publicly certainly does. I would terminate business with a client if they started airing out their issues about me on Twitter. That said, I’m not Apple. At a certain size, you lose the right to reject bad actors.
- kevingadd 3y ago
  Like I said, Apple gives you no other choice. They don't have proper channels for communication on things like software defects or policy. You have to kick up a public outcry to get any help.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Apple gives you no other choice Sweeney and Schiller were emailing. Apple will read a letter you send addressed to their legal team.
- nottorp 3y ago

the_mitsuhiko 3y ago

In Europe there is the concept of “Forced to contract”. You can be forced to accept a customer. Applies to many monopolies.

nottorp 3y ago
Single payer health insurance, for example :)

eviks 3y ago

Why not? There will be more complaints because of your action

015a 3y ago

Epic also doesn't want to be Apple's customer. No one would describe the relationship between Microsoft and Epic as "Epic being Microsoft's customer" because they distribute the Epic Games Store and Fortnite on Windows (Xbox console distribution notwithstanding; there it is more of a customer relationship). Apple forces everyone who wants access to 50% of the mobile computing market into a customer-oriented relationship, and then complains when not everyone Thinks The Same as they do. Its disgusting behavior.

layer8 3y ago

The issue is that Epic doesn’t want to be Apple’s customer in the first place. They want to publish iOS apps. The fact that this requires them to be an Apple customer is the core problem. Imagine if everyone wanting to publish a web app would have to be a customer of the respective browser vendors. Everyone complains about Google and Mozilla and Safari and Edge. Luckily, that doesn’t prevent us from having our web apps running on those browsers.

lelandfe 3y ago
Publishing a Chrome browser extension more-or-less requires being a customer of the Chrome Web Store. There are plenty of other examples, folks tend to give Playstation/Xbox/Switch stores in these conversations as well.
- Phrodo_00 3y ago
  > Publishing a Chrome browser extension more-or-less requires being a customer of the Chrome Web Store Emphasis on more-or-less, though. You can use Chrome developer mode (which is NOT a paid option and doesn't require an account) to import extensions from files. You can't do that in iOS. That's Epic's point.
  - paulmd 3y ago
    you don't need a developer account to sideload an app on ios, and it wouldn't change anything legally if you did (feature tiering is legal) another classic example of android users who don't understand the things they're talking about. go on, tell me more about how "you can't copy and paste between applications in ios" or "there's not even a file browser" please. (now, still not being able to figure out a calculator app on ipad? that's a fair one lol)
    - Zambyte 3y ago
      I didn't believe you so I looked it up, and this[0] is what I found > AltStore then signs the application with your Apple ID so the app can run. You'll need to trust the developer certificate in your device settings, but when you do, any apps that you install through AltStore will work... for seven days. Apple has put several restrictions in place to make the process as difficult as possible, but the developer managed to work around those restrictions. As the clock nears closer to the end of the seven-day period, AltStore will refresh the signing key on the app so that you can get an extra seven days of usage. This can also run in the background. > AltStore makes use of a feature Apple introduced that lets you install *up to three apps* for free using your Apple ID. > However, AltStore relies on a computer on the same network running AltServer, so you'll need both iTunes and iCloud installed on that device. [...] Is this seriously what you're talking about? Because after reading that I still don't believe you can install apps on iOS without Apples splash of iHoly Water TM. [0] https://www.xda-developers.com/how-to-sideload-apps-iphone-altstore/ https://www.xda-developers.com/how-to-sideload-apps-iphone-a...

beeboobaa 3y ago

Then you shouldn't position yourself as a gatekeeper. I also don't want to pay taxes, but have to comply with the law anyway.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

onion2k 3y ago

If I had a Customer that spent years relentlessly complaining about my Company, I know I wouldn't want to have them as a Customer. Epic aren't a customer. They're a supplier. They provide Apple with software that Apple's customers buy. Apple are denying their customers, iPhone users, the option to buy Epic apps through Apple's app store. You should never lose sight of who actually loses here. It's not really Apple or Epic. They're massive corporations that will continue to make billions regardless. The loser is iPhone users who want to use their devices to play a game they enjoy.

yokoprime 3y ago

If someone spends years badmouthing Microsoft, would you say its ok for Microsoft to block their apps from Windows?

johnnyanmac 3y ago

Depends on the ruling and laws. I'm sure someone who didn't allow homosexual couples would not want to welcome them even after it was ruled as unconstitutional to discriminate to them in the US (even if they are middle eastern and laws in their homeland do allow for that). They were technically rowdy customers but the law allows them to be in as long as their rowdiness was due to their identity and not other neutral actions (although we know they will be judged much more harshly on those actions as an attempt to disciminate). A bit of a crude comparison, but I hope it gets the point across that the behavior depends. retaliating against rules that the EU later determines to be bad rules may open a case to allow them, as long as they don't break other rules.

gigel82 3y ago

Epic isn't Apple's customer. Apple is just the local (techno)feudal lord / rentier wanting to tax all merchants trying to sell goods to Apple's serfs.

heisenbit 3y ago

If one stretches ones leverage to the point where it is considered by authorities as excessive and is forced to make concessions one is not in the position to attack those who attacked ones monopolistic behavior. The technical term is is "sitting in a glass house" and while one figures out the layout of the panels one is advised to refrain from throwing rocks. The way I see it Apple is lumping past behavior and current behavior of Epic together to make an exclusion decision. But there was a big change between the past and now so the market situation has changed and access to this changed market should not overly depend on information from a very different world otherwise it can be considered at best arbitrary or an attempt to exclude competitors with irrelevant facts. The latter could get expensive.

overgard 3y ago

Epic is only a customer because Apple's policies forces them to be.

raincole 3y ago

Are you serious? So you think it's okay for Unity to terminate my dev account because I complain about Unity on hacker news? (Replace Unity with Windows, Photoshop or whatever software people constantly complain about.)

Spivak 3y ago

It's not even that, if I was Apple I wouldn't want to have them as a customer simply to deny them standing for their constant lawsuits. If the two companies have absolutely no business relationship at all, ties completely severed then it's a lot harder to demonstrate harm. All you could really sue about is that they won't do business with you. I'm actually surprised it's not SOP to stop doing business with people who sue you after the lawsuit ends. I mean you took the nuclear option.

scotty79 3y ago

Things look a bit different if you are one of two for example electric utility companies in the country. You can't deny someone service just because they said mean thing about you. Companies should be forced to service law abiding customers.