|OT| Epic vs Apple/Google - Battle of the Tims

[Wok]

Yes, but it says licensing fee or comission. And a percentage of revenue is basically a type of commission, right?

I don't think Apple could get a percentage of the revenue which would not go through their in-house payment system.

I mean, before one can earn a cut as a percentage of the revenue, they have to know the total revenue. Since this revenue does not go through their payment system, they would have to ask the devs to fill in "tax forms", and there is no way Apple could ensure that devs tell the truth. They don't have the power of government to fight tax evasion. Even if they did, keep in mind governments struggle with tax evasion.

 

[Ascheroth]

I don't think Apple could get a percentage of the revenue which would not go through their in-house payment system.

I suppose it would shift the money flow from "Apple gets all the money -> pays 70% to dev" to "Dev gets all the money (or a bit less if they use another payment provider) -> reports to Apple that they made X money and pays them based on whatever commission structure is in place".
At least that's something I've seen floating around, I have no idea if this is common and/or working like that in practice, which is why I'll have to wait for Hoeg's take on the entire thing (or someone else who has more understanding of the subject matter and the implications of the finer details of this ruling).

Actually, thinking about it, isn't this how Unreal Engine's licensing/commission works?

 

[Wok]

Actually, thinking about it, isn't this how Unreal Engine's licensing/commission works?

Correct.

I wonder how they can enforce that. I guess they have telemetry to cross-check whether what the devs report is consistent with their stats.

Pretty intrusive.

 

[Alexandros]

Sweeney lost big. Apple only lost the only thing that wasn't possible to win. It's no coincidence that in the other court case that Apple recently settled it happily made the same concession. Apple knows that most people will still pay through IAP and will not follow an external link.

 

[Wok]

That means Epic knows precisely how much money every successful game built with Unreal Engine earns. Crazy stats!
For a $30 game, that would happen after ~ 30k copies sold.

 

[madjoki]

That means Epic knows precisely how much money every successful game built with Unreal Engine earns. Crazy stats!
For a $30 game, that would happen after ~ 30k copies sold.

Unless they have custom UE license without those reporting requirements or commission. (AAA developers mainly)

 

[Alexandros]

A summary of the main takeaways from the ruling:

Apple wins

• Apple is not an illegal monopolist
• The relevant market is mobile gaming, not iOS
• In-app purchases are not a separate product illegally tied to the App Store
• The walled-garden model does provide pro-consumer security benefits
• Apple can mandate the use of IAP
• Apple is entitled to a commission or license fee even if alternative payment methods are used
• iOS is not an essential facility
• Android phones, cloud gaming and devices like the Switch and Steam Deck are competing with Apple devices
• Apple can ban Fortnite, Epic and all of its subsidiaries from the App Store
• Epic has to pay Apple 30% of the money it made through the direct purchase option

Epic wins

• Apple can no longer forbid apps from linking to external payment systems or notifying users of alternative payment options
• The lack of other app stores on iOS does stifle innovation

 

[prudis]

the judge has been quite savage

 

[Ascheroth]

Hoeg's video.
Jeez, 2 and a half hours

 

[Arc]

'Fortnite' creator Epic Games to appeal ruling in Apple case

"Fortnite" game maker Epic Games on Sunday said in a legal filing that it plans to appeal a ruling in its antitrust case against Apple Inc after a federal judge on Friday handed down a mixed decision.

www.reuters.com

 

[Alexandros]

'Fortnite' creator Epic Games to appeal ruling in Apple case

"Fortnite" game maker Epic Games on Sunday said in a legal filing that it plans to appeal a ruling in its antitrust case against Apple Inc after a federal judge on Friday handed down a mixed decision.

www.reuters.com

Epic won so big in the case (according to the media) that Tim felt bad for Apple and is appealing to give it a second chance. What a sweetheart.

 

[Mivey]

Epic won so big in the case (according to the media) that Tim felt bad for Apple and is appealing to give it a second chance. What a sweetheart.

Expecting headlines to be like:
"Epic addicted to winning?
Appeals trial they totally 100% won, for some reason"

 

[madjoki]

In surper surprising move Apple also appeals, blames Tim Sweeney & Press for misinforming that decission allows bypassing Apple fee.

All documents are in recap archive:

Docket for Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc., 4:20-cv-05640 - CourtListener.com

Docket for Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc., 4:20-cv-05640 — Brought to you by the RECAP Initiative and Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information.

www.courtlistener.com

 

[madjoki]

Hoeg's video of (I assume) above documents.

 

[Morten88]

 

[Arc]

I watched a Hoeg Law video on the topic last night and he was spot on (as usual).

 

[Alexandros]

Tim just can't catch a break.

 

[madjoki]

I watched a Hoeg Law video on the topic last night and he was spot on (as usual).

Well, he read Apple's reply and Apple found very damning precedent that made what judge did, not consistent with application of law, soo there was really no choice here. (Especially as it's something that can't really be undone).

Seems like the judge made mistake of deciding result of wanting that specific part of policy gone (forbidding links) and trying to get law support that (without opening floodgates for everything).