3 ms·

It's hard to say Epic really won when they lost so many of their arguments. This case could have ended in Apple being required to allow third party stores like

It's hard to say Epic really won when they lost so many of their arguments. This case could have ended in Apple being required to allow third party stores like they do in the EU, and that would have been much better for Epic and for consumers. I'm glad the judge is willing to enforce her judgement though. When it first came out it wasn't clear whether enforcement would be meaningful.

ocdtrekkie 1y ago
It's really hard to bring a case against one of the most powerful and valuable companies on the planet. The strategy here was obviously to throw every possible complaint out, knowing that not all of them will work. You don't go to court expecting a full sweep, you expect to land a hit. Bringing ten claims is giving them ten chances to win. Which Epic did, and ultimately, the downstream effects of this will end up upending the mobile app economy entirely. I think the outcome here was inevitable, but I'm certainly annoyed how long it takes. Epic has lucked out in the fact that Apple very unwisely angered the judge, which is a really, really bad idea. It's common for nothing to actually change until all of the appeals are exhausted, and this case probably has another five years of appeals and motions and stuff ahead of it. (Google v. Oracle, another huge big tech case, took 11 years!) But YGR is clearly so irritated at Apple's bull---- she decided to make things effective immediately. Apple's game of course, is about protecting the 30% cut at all cost. Once it is dead and buried and the appeals are over, I suspect Apple will look to globally unify it's rules again, so you'll probably see things pioneered in the EU, like third party stores, and things pioneered in the US, like anti-steering rules, eventually get applied globally once they start having to compete fairly on IAP costs.

3 ms·

It's hard to say Epic really won when they lost so many of their arguments. This case could have ended in Apple being required to allow third party stores like

by modeless 1y ago

ocdtrekkie 1y ago
It's really hard to bring a case against one of the most powerful and valuable companies on the planet. The strategy here was obviously to throw every possible complaint out, knowing that not all of them will work. You don't go to court expecting a full sweep, you expect to land a hit. Bringing ten claims is giving them ten chances to win. Which Epic did, and ultimately, the downstream effects of this will end up upending the mobile app economy entirely. I think the outcome here was inevitable, but I'm certainly annoyed how long it takes. Epic has lucked out in the fact that Apple very unwisely angered the judge, which is a really, really bad idea. It's common for nothing to actually change until all of the appeals are exhausted, and this case probably has another five years of appeals and motions and stuff ahead of it. (Google v. Oracle, another huge big tech case, took 11 years!) But YGR is clearly so irritated at Apple's bull---- she decided to make things effective immediately. Apple's game of course, is about protecting the 30% cut at all cost. Once it is dead and buried and the appeals are over, I suspect Apple will look to globally unify it's rules again, so you'll probably see things pioneered in the EU, like third party stores, and things pioneered in the US, like anti-steering rules, eventually get applied globally once they start having to compete fairly on IAP costs.