Court issues permanent injunction in Epic v. Apple case

[Newbie_52]

So apple gets a cut even if payment is outside the store? Doesn't sound like a win for anyone except apple.☹

 

[Aurelius]

So apple gets a cut even if payment is outside the store? Doesn't sound like a win for anyone except apple.☹

No — if an app maker points users to a payment system outside of the App Store, Apple can't do much about it. But (as I understand it) this doesn't change that Apple can require its own in-app purchase system as a choice, and that it can take its existing cuts of those sales. So it might not change much in practice.

 

[ChadD]

No — if an app maker points users to a payment system outside of the App Store, Apple can't do much about it. But (as I understand it) this doesn't change that Apple can require its own in-app purchase system as a choice, and that it can take its existing cuts of those sales. So it might not change much in practice.

This pretty much allows Epic to do the exact thing Apple fired them for though. They can offer Apple and offer a Epic pay option that gives more. This won't do anything for little companies no one trusts. For the big players like Epic I'm sure most people will be fine going and paying Epic for a 20% bonus of fake game currency.

I'm not sure if Epic really thought they had any shot of getting the Epic store oked for iOS. Sometimes though you ask for more then what you really want so you can get what you want in a compromise. Although I'm sure if they pulled off the hail merry they would have half arsed a iOS epic store that would have sucked hard. lol

 

[Delicieuxz]

It turns out the possibility of external payments didn't mean "pay Apple nothing". The 30% is tied to the App Store contract - agreed to when publishing an app - not the payment processing. That means Apple gets their cut no matter where payment processes.


https://twitter.com/HoegLaw/status/1436395708110737423

In short, Epic wanted to pay nothing to have a presence on Apple's massive platform - to exist on the App Store for free while generating profit at zero cost or overhead. That was shot down. Quotes from the ruling

Someone in response to his Twitter post there says:

https://twitter.com/MishaTarkus/status/1436415421519994889
"I believe this might be a misinterpretation of the relevant passage. It is referring to Sweeney's belief that there should be no commission on Apple's own IAP service, and this can be seen in this earlier passage where it elaborates on the usage of the term in the document itself"

I'll add that I exercise caution when listening to what Hoeg and other YT lawyers claim. They are great sources for insight and technical understanding. But lawyers are still legal advocates for other people's interests and they have their angles which serve their particular practices.

Hoeg is a software industry and contract lawyer who is totally and staunchly in the corner of big business and corporations getting their way in everything they want through their ToS and EULAs, and so he unapologetically shills for their side on matters. I've seen him determinedly argue as if fact what is pointedly at best opinion and preference, while being outright false in some parts of the world, such as his belief that people don't own their software, when there are some entirely authoritative rulings contradicting his preference in parts of the world, and none completely validating his preferred view for any country in the world. When he was presented some rulings affirming software ownership, such as the one by the EU Court of Justice (the highest authority in the EU, whose rulings apply for almost half-a-billion people), he responded to comments not by acknowledging or addressing the rulings to challenge or contextualize them in any way that would support his preferred view, but instead by simply ignoring them to just baselessly re-assert what is only his preferred view on the matter, as if nothing challenging his preferred view had been presented him.

Hoeg has been very vocal about his personal belief (or dogma) that a contract (and he has a reaching view of what constitutes as one) should be the highest sacred authority and that a business should be able to put any terms it wants into one and that the right of other parties is to agree to those terms or go elsewhere. It's a position that is hardline one-sided in favour of the business writing the terms. So, in the case between Apple's ToS on in-app payments and EG's argument that it is unjustifiable, he's going to default to a view that Apple deserves to set whatever terms they want and that challenges to those terms are not justified.

 

[cybereality]

I'm not sure if Epic really thought they had any shot of getting the Epic store oked for iOS.

It was a long shot, sure, but that was what they wanted. And what I wanted as well.

 

[Newbie_52]

If they could have got egs allowed on ios, then paid devs to be exclusive to egs instead of the ios app store 😆

 

[DPI]

If they could have got egs allowed on ios, then paid devs to be exclusive to egs instead of the ios app store 😆

You say it jokingly yet that's exactly what they would've begun doing next- looking at the top App Store games the same way they monitor Steam's Top Wishlisted, and then begun spamming those developers with bribe offers to delete their apps from Apple's store and sell only on EGS.

And Tim would continue to insist "We're doing this for the little guy! Competition and freedom!"

 

[cybereality]

Even with exclusives, EGS on iOS could still be a win.

Developers get guaranteed payout, reducing risk and lets them keep the lights on. Consumers get potentially lower prices (due to lower than 30% processing fees).

Also, EGS is highly curated and censored, but it would open up other stores like itch.io, so if you want to play hentai on your phone that then becomes an option.

 

[DooKey]

A plague on both your houses.

 

[DukenukemX]

So apple gets a cut even if payment is outside the store? Doesn't sound like a win for anyone except apple.☹

The average Apple users has no problem spending money. The average Android user on the other hand...

 

[Lakados]

Even with exclusives, EGS on iOS could still be a win.

Developers get guaranteed payout, reducing risk and lets them keep the lights on. Consumers get potentially lower prices (due to lower than 30% processing fees).

Also, EGS is highly curated and censored, but it would open up other stores like itch.io, so if you want to play hentai on your phone that then becomes an option.

But in reality consumers prices have gone up, they don’t compete for pricing they never have. Unless you are waiting for the big sale or snagging the titles when they are free. But they’ve never tried edging each other out for a few $ here or there on a new or recent title. They don’t do it at box stores for consoles, and they don’t do it for PC games between digital stores. They don’t even do it for movies and music between box/digital stores.

 

[cybereality]

Yeah, I guess you are right. In this case, with entertainment media, it wouldn't help the creators or the storefronts to lower prices. So they don't do it, makes sense.

 

[rinaldo00]

But in reality consumers prices have gone up, they don’t compete for pricing they never have. Unless you are waiting for the big sale or snagging the titles when they are free. But they’ve never tried edging each other out for a few $ here or there on a new or recent title. They don’t do it at box stores for consoles, and they don’t do it for PC games between digital stores. They don’t even do it for movies and music between box/digital stores.

That is not true. I have found pre-release sales on games including AAA titles that very by as much as 10% between GMG, Fanatical, and other verified resellers.

 

[sharknice]

But in reality consumers prices have gone up, they don’t compete for pricing they never have. Unless you are waiting for the big sale or snagging the titles when they are free. But they’ve never tried edging each other out for a few $ here or there on a new or recent title. They don’t do it at box stores for consoles, and they don’t do it for PC games between digital stores. They don’t even do it for movies and music between box/digital stores.

That's mostly because the developers won't allow it

But there have been many times where EGS has had coupons for $15 off brand new games. They tried straight selling for cheaper but some developers cried that it was devaluing their games so EGS just does unlimited coupons instead.

There also have been games that exclusively launched on EGS and sold for cheaper than they would have otherwise.

I haven't paid $60+ for a new game in ages.

 

[LukeTbk]

But in reality consumers prices have gone up

Did they really ? On the clearer consoles side outside the N64 supper pricey craze it has been very very stable over time with a clear down trend

On PC in my market that a very similar story I think, in 94-1995 a new game was often around $60 Canadian, if my memory serve me well, that about $100 today.

 

[cybereality]

Not to mention that today you can buy a variety of indie games for like $10. Not every purchase needs to be a $60 AAA game.

 

[sharknice]

Not to mention that today you can buy a variety of indie games for like $10. Not every purchase needs to be a $60 AAA game.

And those $10 indie games are often better than the AAA games of the past. Games are increasingly better and more complex because of how much better and more accessible the tools are. They've also become cheaper because of the same reasons. It's so easy to make games and so many people want to do it.

There's so much free content now you don't even need to spend money and you'll still have more games than you have time for that are better than you would have had spending hundreds or thousands of dollars in the past.

 

[dandirk]

I'm torn on this. There could be a minor improvement in pricing from store competition, but on the flip side of that it is going to result in the mobile landscape becoming yet another fragmented confusing mess, just like gaming is now.

....

Honestly, the whole gaming experience has gone to shit since the store platforms fragmented, and now I expect the same of mobile.

I am there right with you on exclusives (same for streaming)...

Though I don't think "law" in the US can be justified to limit exclusives. It would have to be cultural behavior.

Personally I just ignore exclusives. If the game is good, I can wait a year and get it on sale. Sometimes I remember (it must be good) and sometimes I forget.

Seriously I agree with your feelings on the subject. Streaming has basically done the same thing (and my thoughts are basically the same, its all 'bout the client), Netflix made me a reformed pirate, now my pirating is a better service then ever.

I WANT to be their sucker consumer, at a position in my life where I can easily afford to do so. Navigating multiple services is getting better (combined search/UIs etc) but the actual viewing experience is still left (when I randomly use prime/Netflix, I pirate so one UI)

 

[cybereality]

But if we want competition, then exclusives are a part of that. There would be no point if there were 10 different streaming/gaming platforms with the exact same content.

For me, I definitely prefer Steam, but I have no problem buying some games on Epic if they are exclusively there (or if there is a freebie or big sale). It's not a big deal to have another client on the computer.

 

[Newbie_52]

But if we want competition, then exclusives are a part of that. There would be no point if there were 10 different streaming/gaming platforms with the exact same content.

For me, I definitely prefer Steam, but I have no problem buying some games on Epic if they are exclusively there (or if there is a freebie or big sale). It's not a big deal to have another client on the computer.

So theres no point in Having a choice in where to buy a game ? Not sure about that.. Want to compete with a competitor? build a better product/service etc and make me want to use your service.

 

[cybereality]

Sure, but Valve has been developing Steam for like 15 years, while Epic Game Store is only a few years old. Obviously Steam is going to have more features.

But, honestly, I don't care about most of Steams features, cards and gems or whatever, I couldn't care less. I can play games on EGS, cloud saves work now, there is a wishlist, it has the basic functionality.

Yes, it is not as good as Steam, but I would say it's acceptable right now (with the promise that they will continue to improve it). For example, it could use a shopping cart, and better navigation for the store (it's hard to get back to where you were once you click a game). But these are things that are fixable.

I think at some point maybe exclusives won't be needed. But right now it makes sense. Also, note that Steam has a ton of exclusives. There are many games that you literally cannot buy anywhere else, even the physical box is just a Steam code. Even if Valve didn't pay the developer, the effect is the same.

 

[Ebernanut]

Epic just filed an appeal so we know they didn't get what they wanted, next we'll see if Apple appeals. If they're both unhappy it was probably a good ruling.

 

[DPI]

For me, I definitely prefer Steam, but I have no problem buying some games on Epic if they are exclusively there (or if there is a freebie or big sale). It's not a big deal to have another client on the computer.

It would become a big deal if you had purchased one or more games and then you lost access to those games because the toddler CEO throws a tantrum, or enters pissing contests because he wants more money and doesn't care how it impacts customers. Just ask angry Fortnite players that are now finally - finally- turning on Tim.

Fortunately just about every other digital platform seems to be run by stable and rational adults, and you have a reasonable assumption you'll have access to your games when you go to play them.

 

[DPI]

I think at some point maybe exclusives won't be needed. But right now it makes sense. Also, note that Steam has a ton of exclusives. There are many games that you literally cannot buy anywhere else, even the physical box is just a Steam code. Even if Valve didn't pay the developer, the effect is the same.

Big difference between a publisher choosing to sell their game on Steam - but then for whatever reasons don't or can't sell it on other stores (like EGS rejecting a game if the publisher won't remove it from Steam), VERSUS Epic trying to bribe for an exclusive for the sole purpose of keeping it off of Steam.

I'll make it even simpler:

Valve: Sell your game on Steam, sell it anywhere else - you're welcome on the platform no matter what.

Epic: You can sell your game on EGS but only if you don't sell it on Steam, otherwise we're not interested. Unless your game is too high profile for us to muscle and have enoug leverage over, then we'll take it without preconditions.

So attempting to conflate these two "exclusives" like they're remotely the same is just dishonest.

 

[GDI Lord]

Apple has a much larger fanbase than Fortnite does

... in America. Think globally.

 

[kac77]

Except it wasn't judged that way. The judge stated "the court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws,” and "success is not illegal".

That might be the case but it doesn't change reality. Google/Apple ARE monopolies in the cell phone landscape. Anyone denying that is a retarded. Anti-trust is NOT about success. Anti-Trust is about using your competitive edge to lock out competition. Apple and Google have done that in spades.

But alas this doesn't change this corporatist court system. Just commenting on the fact that their ruling makes fucking zero sense.

 

[Lakados]

Epic just filed an appeal so we know they didn't get what they wanted, next we'll see if Apple appeals. If they're both unhappy it was probably a good ruling.

Apple likely won’t, they had the same ruling placed against them in a handful of other countries already.

 

[CptCabbit]

Sure, but Valve has been developing Steam for like 15 years, while Epic Game Store is only a few years old. Obviously Steam is going to have more features.

But, honestly, I don't care about most of Steams features, cards and gems or whatever, I couldn't care less. I can play games on EGS, cloud saves work now, there is a wishlist, it has the basic functionality.

Yes, it is not as good as Steam, but I would say it's acceptable right now (with the promise that they will continue to improve it). For example, it could use a shopping cart, and better navigation for the store (it's hard to get back to where you were once you click a game). But these are things that are fixable.

I think at some point maybe exclusives won't be needed. But right now it makes sense. Also, note that Steam has a ton of exclusives. There are many games that you literally cannot buy anywhere else, even the physical box is just a Steam code. Even if Valve didn't pay the developer, the effect is the same.

There's a difference between features like the card system, and basic functions like a shopping cart. If anything EGS should've started with more functionality because steam has been around so long. It'd be like creating a car company now and your first car is a model T. They don't need to be making supercars, but maybe ones with powersteering and an automatic transmission.

It's also been almost 3 years of their supporters asking for the functional things like a shopping cart.

 

[LukeTbk]

Though I don't think "law" in the US can be justified to limit exclusives. It would have to be cultural behavior.

You could be right in the current climate, not so long ago, if you look how much the US used law to limit exclusives on television, movie theater, etc.... it could all pass. If the cultural behavior would be for it the legislator would do it.

In the 60s to 80s it was enforced by state for TV chain to give away prime time hours to an open market to the highest bidders and so on, untils 2 year's ago a movie studio could not own movie theaters is that significantly different than a game publisher cannot own a game resellers (physical or digital) ? Maybe it is because of how many are easily accessible to a customer unlike a local movie theater.

I would not be surprised if they could even eliminate the concept by just eliminating the link between store and creators of what is sold in them if they wanted, forcing them to create independent company that run said store and making illegal do make any deals that include some form of you can only sales my stuff or get a larger share if you refuse so sell competitor items.

 

[DPI]

This guy....

 

[DukenukemX]

But if we want competition, then exclusives are a part of that. There would be no point if there were 10 different streaming/gaming platforms with the exact same content.

That's how movie theaters work and that seems to be just fine. If content was the same then companies would have to worry about how they deliver that content and not the content itself. God forbid Netflix allowed me to use their app on Chinese branded tablets or that Apple and Google would need a store exclusive to gaming like how Steam and Epic handle it.

 

[Lakados]

This guy....

View attachment 394942

God he’s whiny… I’m sure if he wanted they could release their own hardware develop an Epic store for an open flavour of Android and make that do all the things they want a platform to do. Would have been cheaper than their lawsuit but they know 100% there isn’t a way to monetize that in a way that would get shareholder approval.
Isn’t there some merit to bring the change you want to see. They can’t even make a profitable store and their model for profit involves taking some 30-40% of steams annual sales which at current rates is something like 10 years off. Unless they score some major major exclusives, like the new upcoming Skyrim, or GTA titles. Which really I mean no that won’t happen.
If they want to change the landscape they have to show that developers can get more from their platform while giving consumers a reason to use it in a way that doesn’t piss us off. And so far they have failed to do that outside of giving away free titles, though I would gladly trade free titles for lower prices and a god damned shopping cart. Their take is only 12% opposed to everybody else’s 20%, if that 8% was coming off the retail price straight up that would be a reason but a quick look shows them either more expensive than steam (due to sale prices) or the same price. Not much of an incentive there to use their store.

 

[Lakados]

Did they really ? On the cleared consoles side outside the N64 supper pricey craze it has been very very stable over time with a clear down trend

On PC in my market that a very similar story I think, in 94-1995 a new game was often around $60 Canadian, if my memory serve me well, that about $100 today.

Maybe it's just a Canada thing and it's our exchange rate that is shit but it seems things here that were once $59.99 are now closer to $79.99 instead.

 

[Armenius]

So when will the Sweeney Phone be coming out?

 

[LukeTbk]

Maybe it's just a Canada thing and it's our exchange rate that is shit but it seems things here that were once $59.99 are now closer to $79.99 instead.

Which would be a close constant price or a diminished one. We have the same view, $60 games of the mid 90s instead of being $100 today if video game price would not have moved are now $80, I think money save on brick and morter, scale of sales, competition from piracy, etc... made that happen.

 

[noko]

With EPIC game store if I run a game with problems where is the forums where I can get help? Get input for different strategies? Steam is superior in my opinion in so many ways in a compact way. EPIC Crysis Remaster I had to use Discord which I have problems with connecting to the Crysis server, one has to do that for each game and maybe different platforms as well? I see no benefit in buying from EPIC over Steam for the same price or even if the price was 20%-30% less due to Steam service in general is worth it.

On this ruling, can EPIC create an ingame EPIC store where users can buy other games? Totally bypassing Apple Store? Not that it would be any good.

I also don't give a $h.. about that Steam had 17years+ making their service so it is OK for EPIC to have Exclusives. Did Walmart or Target or GameStop during the CD/DVD era have exclusive games where you could only buy the AAA game at Walmart? Plus Tesla out of the blue with no real history now has a huge automobile presences due to what? INNOVATION!

Epic seems to want others to do the work for them, government to restrict other companies, their store not competing with others for users by having exclusives and so on, use the Apple store and servers to download their content while they have a backdoor to collect money against what they agreed to with Apple (great the Judge is making EPIC pay back the illegitimate purchases from buyers).

I may get FarCry 6 from EPIC, wait, may just buy it from UBIsoft and attached it to the Steam account .

 

[Armenius]

With EPIC game store if I run a game with problems where is the forums where I can get help? Get input for different strategies? Steam is superior in my opinion in so many ways in a compact way. EPIC Crysis Remaster I had to use Discord which I have problems with connecting to the Crysis server, one has to do that for each game and maybe different platforms as well? I see no benefit in buying from EPIC over Steam for the same price or even if the price was 20%-30% less due to Steam service in general is worth it.

On this ruling, can EPIC create an ingame EPIC store where users can buy other games? Totally bypassing Apple Store? Not that it would be any good.

I also don't give a $h.. about that Steam had 17years+ making their service so it is OK for EPIC to have Exclusives. Did Walmart or Target or GameStop during the CD/DVD era have exclusive games where you could only buy the AAA game at Walmart? Plus Tesla out of the blue with no real history now has a huge automobile presences due to what? INNOVATION!

Epic seems to want others to do the work for them, government to restrict other companies, their store not competing with others for users by having exclusives and so on, use the Apple store and servers to download their content while they have a backdoor to collect money against what they agreed to with Apple (great the Judge is making EPIC pay back the illegitimate purchases from buyers).

I may get FarCry 6 from EPIC, wait, may just buy it from UBIsoft and attached it to the Steam account .

You always see people who purchased a game on Epic coming to the Steam forums for help if the game also has a Steam page. Maybe that should be telling Epic that these community features they so confidently said are not important really are?

 

[Lakados]

It's funny hearing people like you call that whining when I see posts splattered on anything remotely Epic related whining about how much you hate EGS.

I don’t hate it, I use it, had to for MW5: Mercs and I have gotten a lot of free stuff from it. But if the price between Epic and Steam is the same, what incentive is there to make me use EPYCs store. To date they have offered no incentive outside of free games or exclusives.
I would happily use them if they offered a better experience or price, they at this stage offer neither but I do like that they have a modding section for their store that lets you browse submitted 3’rd party mods and add them via the Epyc store that’s actually a good feature, and they should push it more. Adding a cart, the ability to purchase as gifts, and a few other features would make them a real contender and it is something we have been asking for since their launch.
If you look at my previous posts about steam you will see a consistent hate for them as I am still bitter at how they launched themselves. My area didn’t get “high speed” until 2007’ish, buying a new game in box with a CD only to find out it only contained the game manual, steam installer, and a redemption code really choked me. I had to get a shitty laptop and external HDD to install steam to it so I could go to the library to use their network to download the games to the external drives to copy them to my desktop. And the fact I wasn’t informed of this before buying really choked me. And to this day I’m butt hurt about it.

 

[cybereality]

I think it's an important fight, but using Fortnite as leverage to try to sue Apple, I don't know. Not a great strategy.

I think noko is right about innovation. Maybe Epic should have spent that money making their own Android fork OS, or their own phone. They have the cash to do it.

 

[cybereality]

Also, the fact that Sweeney tweets all that stuff from an iPhone is not without irony.