Fractal Design Pop Air RGB Black TG review
Palit GeForce GTX 1630 4GB Dual review
FSP Dagger Pro (850W PSU) review
Razer Leviathan V2 gaming soundbar review
Guru3D NVMe Thermal Test - the heatsink vs. performance
EnGenius ECW220S 2x2 Cloud Access Point review
Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora HPE 360 LCS cooler review
Noctua NH-D12L CPU Cooler Review
Silicon Power XPOWER XS70 1TB NVMe SSD Review
Hyte Y60 chassis review
Apple sues EPIC, accuses developer of theft with Fortnite
In the charge, Apple accuses Epic Games of theft by putting its own payment system in the Fortnite app. With this, Epic bypassed the payment rules of the App Store. The rules state that developers must pay 30 percent of all their digital purchases to Apple.
"Epic's breaches of contractual obligations and other misconduct has seriously harmed Apple," Apple writes in the indictment. "With this, the company threatens the entire iOS ecosystem and its value to customers."
According to Apple, Epic has benefited greatly from promoting Fortnite through the App Store. The game is said to have earned more than 600 million dollars (509 million euros) on iOS. Apple is asking a court in California to determine that Epic Games is guilty of a violation of the App Store rules. The company is also asking for compensation.
Apple and Epic Games are at odds
Epic Games sued Apple in August after the company removed Fortnite from its app store for adding its own payment system. Epic accuses Apple of abuse of power and wants to enforce through the courts that the rules of the App Store are adjusted. The company calls the 30 percent commission far too high. Apple called it "regrettable" that the game company was breaking the rules. According to Apple, those rules are there to keep users safe. Running payments through the App Store would reduce the chances of scams or other issues.
Epic can respond to Apple's charges until September 18. A hearing will take place on September 28.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5827482 Posted on: 09/09/2020 09:50 AM
I can't imagine myself walking into grocery store and starting to sell my stuff there
Not that I like Apple's closedness. But who is ultimate judge here that decide if Apple can have closed platform?
Users. And they did support it with their wallets.
I can't imagine myself walking into grocery store and starting to sell my stuff there
Not that I like Apple's closedness. But who is ultimate judge here that decide if Apple can have closed platform?
Users. And they did support it with their wallets.
Backstabak
Senior Member
Posts: 827
Joined: 2015-11-13
Senior Member
Posts: 827
Joined: 2015-11-13
#5827487 Posted on: 09/09/2020 10:01 AM
I can't imagine myself walking into grocery store and starting to sell my stuff there
Not that I like Apple's closedness. But who is ultimate judge here that decide if Apple can have closed platform?
Users. And they did support it with their wallets.
But Epic was selling things in their own app, not apple store. Even though Epic store was distributed through apple store.
I kinda dislike both companies, but I'd say that the claim is ridiculous. It would be theft if Epic didn't pay apple 30% on sales that they did through apple's app store, but that isn't what apple is claiming.
I can't imagine myself walking into grocery store and starting to sell my stuff there
Not that I like Apple's closedness. But who is ultimate judge here that decide if Apple can have closed platform?
Users. And they did support it with their wallets.
But Epic was selling things in their own app, not apple store. Even though Epic store was distributed through apple store.
I kinda dislike both companies, but I'd say that the claim is ridiculous. It would be theft if Epic didn't pay apple 30% on sales that they did through apple's app store, but that isn't what apple is claiming.
sbacchetta
Senior Member
Posts: 140
Joined: 2015-12-21
Senior Member
Posts: 140
Joined: 2015-12-21
#5827491 Posted on: 09/09/2020 10:09 AM
The problem with this whole Apple vs Epic fight is two fold. First monopoly are not forbidden by law, but abusing a dominant (market wise) position is (whatever you have a "perfect" monopoly or not).
On the consumer side Apple have definitively a dominant position, they are the sole provider of App for their own device, and yes consumer can use another system (android), but it come with a cost for them (buying a new device), The same way, if your local electric company is charging you abusive rate for electricity, you could move to escape those rate but again this has a cost. This to the judge to decide, taking in account de cost of moving, how much the company is abusive, and how much the average consumer new about it before making his purchase.
On The developer side, this is tricky, because while apple device don't have a dominant position for market share (at least worldwide, don't remember the US market share), they have a dominant market share for revenue made from mobile. So when an App developer refuse to accept the Apple App store rule, he cut himself from a significant part of potential income. A judge could decide that Apple App store rule are too restrictive and abusive, and because the App store is the biggest source of income for App worldwide, Apple is abusing of its position.
The problem with this whole Apple vs Epic fight is two fold. First monopoly are not forbidden by law, but abusing a dominant (market wise) position is (whatever you have a "perfect" monopoly or not).
On the consumer side Apple have definitively a dominant position, they are the sole provider of App for their own device, and yes consumer can use another system (android), but it come with a cost for them (buying a new device), The same way, if your local electric company is charging you abusive rate for electricity, you could move to escape those rate but again this has a cost. This to the judge to decide, taking in account de cost of moving, how much the company is abusive, and how much the average consumer new about it before making his purchase.
On The developer side, this is tricky, because while apple device don't have a dominant position for market share (at least worldwide, don't remember the US market share), they have a dominant market share for revenue made from mobile. So when an App developer refuse to accept the Apple App store rule, he cut himself from a significant part of potential income. A judge could decide that Apple App store rule are too restrictive and abusive, and because the App store is the biggest source of income for App worldwide, Apple is abusing of its position.
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 13103
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 13103
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5827495 Posted on: 09/09/2020 10:14 AM
Lawyers are getting rich, that's the only thing for sure with this topic.
Lawyers are getting rich, that's the only thing for sure with this topic.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 213
Joined: 2019-04-21
Wow, this really got out of hand quickly.