|OT| Epic vs Apple/Google - Battle of the Tims
- Thread starter warp_
- Start date
Epic's lawyer is super aggressive, she's grilling Schiller. As a fellow lawyer, combined with all the earlier sex talk, it kinda turned me on to be honest. 
Sounds like what someone that searches BSDM on TikTok would sayEpic's lawyer is super aggressive, she's grilling Schiller. As a fellow lawyer, combined with all the earlier sex talk, it kinda turned me on to be honest.
I assume this is the most likely outcome. I don't know what kind of power the judge would have to force Apple to make company policy changes, but she might strongly recommend Apple revise its anti-steering rules and its game streaming rules. Apple will probably comply to get regulators off their back.
Epic(40% owned by Tencent) grilling Tim Cook because of China is some funny shit.
Tim Cook is not having a fun time, the judge really grilled him.
Closing arguments are today, but otherwise the trial is done and the only thing left is to await the verdict and the years of appeals. Just from watching the Hoeg videos, I think Epic will get a partial win (primarily with steering rules), but they most likely aren't getting what they really wanted. It would be funny if both companies wound up appealing the verdict.
Yeah I'm very curious to see what the final verdict will be. I followed the proceedings pretty closely and it does seem that some sort of ban on Apple anti-steering rules will happen. The most important fact about such a verdict in my opinion won't be how said ban is going to be implemented but that, in order to impose it, the judge necessarily has to rule that Apple does have a monopoly over its own ecosystem. This would be huge since it would mean that owners of walled gardens can't hide behind the "it's all proprietary and we can do what we want" argument anymore.
just imagine HOW pissed at Tim will both Sony and MS be if that happens
especially Sony
So the trial is over, and now to wait for the veredict, so what we learned?
Epic and Sweeney wants:
-to not pay fees inside the app because of impulse buy(fuck them kids);
-a exclusive deal with Apple to benefit only Epic(fuck them devs);
-to Apple to distribute EGS through the App Store without fees;
-To be the supreme overlord of a Oasis(Ready Player One) type world whem AR hits;
-To have control of all the money inside the Oasis;
Apple wants:
-to everything to stay the same;
Am I missing something?
Epic and Sweeney wants:
-to not pay fees inside the app because of impulse buy(fuck them kids);
-a exclusive deal with Apple to benefit only Epic(fuck them devs);
-to Apple to distribute EGS through the App Store without fees;
-To be the supreme overlord of a Oasis(Ready Player One) type world whem AR hits;
-To have control of all the money inside the Oasis;
Apple wants:
-to everything to stay the same;
Am I missing something?
I mean, the humorless trolls on the internet had already figured those out.
But now is all documented and in the open.
So, Epic essentially won even though it wasn't due to their own arguments (monopoly etc.)? What?
www.theverge.com
Or I don't get it, this seems to imply they can input their own in app payments to avoid the fees, right? But nothing on the "allow other stores on iOS" front, right?
Apple must allow other forms of in-app purchase, rules judge in Epic v. Apple
The app store model on trial.
www.theverge.com
Last edited:
Actually, it's a bit weaker than the headline of this article suggests. The judge orders Apple to allow external links of various kinds which then allow people to purchase things. So Apple doesn't have to outright allow Paypal or other payment services. They just can't stop an app developer from linking to their own website, where they can use whatever payment mechanism they like.So, Epic essentially won even though it wasn't due to their own arguments (monopoly etc.)? What?
Apple must allow other forms of in-app purchase, rules judge in Epic v. Apple
The app store model on trial.
More like Apple's defense of why no other payments methods wasn't good enough to sway it from being anti-steering, but they don't need to allow other app stores nor direct payments methods - just external, as I understand itSo, Epic essentially won even though it wasn't due to their own arguments (monopoly etc.)? What?
Or I don't get it, this seems to imply they can input their own in app payments to avoid the fees, right? But nothing on the "allow other stores on iOS" front, right?Apple must allow other forms of in-app purchase, rules judge in Epic v. Apple
The app store model on trial.
Edit: Mind you, Epic will probavly have a PR tweet blitz ready to go about how they won, this is huge for the little guy, theyre helping other app devs etc
Okay, that'd be nice if Epic really lost their big desires, but the "buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to In-App Purchasing" seems to imply the payment methods can be built in & just as easy to use as In-App Purchasing for the user with a button, no?
Last edited:
Apple doesn't have to let Epic back on. If Steve Jobs were still around, Epic would be banned permanently, but I have no clue what Tim Cook will do.
I'm pretty sure Apple's Lawyers could word it so that it makes Apple seem like the nice people and let fortnite back on for that sweet, sweet Fortnite money.
Tim would cry but would the Fortnite fanbase care? Are they loyal to Fortnite or Epic? Was there a large fortnite community on Apple that would come back to the ecosystem or have they moved on?
Tim would cry but would the Fortnite fanbase care? Are they loyal to Fortnite or Epic? Was there a large fortnite community on Apple that would come back to the ecosystem or have they moved on?
This is a tiny concession. With anti-Silicon Valley legislation happening around the world, and with Big Tech facing antitrust action in the US, Apple was already prepared to make that concession. All this case has done is bring it forward a couple of years.
I dunno fortnite money is very sweet
It's chump change for Apple. Fortnite makes most of its money on console.
I don't know how Apple are going to act, but Epic is steadfast that they won't bring it back until they get what they want.
Frankly I think Apple will keep the status quo - ban Fortnite but leave the tools well alone. But I'd be interested to see what happens if they ban the tools also.
Good. They should be.
It will probably never happen in the US, but F2P "whaling" and in particular gacha games should be heavily regulated.
so basically, Apple has to allow apps to link to external payment options, but they can still block apps from offering alternative payment options within the app itself? doesn't seem like that big a blow for them if so
Absolutely.
Regardless of whether they do it or not though, if I were an iOS developer and would have to choose an engine, I'm not so sure I'd pick Unreal. In that sense it will definitely hurt Epic anyway.
Phoenix RISING
A phoenix always RISES!
Seems like an Epic L.
Apple can keep Fortnite off the Apple Store, too.
Apple can keep Fortnite off the Apple Store, too.
They both lost, but I'm not so sure Apple lost as much as Jason is thinking.
Sill, will have to wait for Hoeg's video on that for the details, will probably have more insights on how that could or would work.
So even if an app had no IAP and directed all purchases to an outside website, Apple would still be allowed to collect money. Whether that means they still claim 30% or have a lower cut for outside purchases or base the commission/licensing fee on something else entirely, I dunno. But it seems the "make F2P app and only include off-app purchases, get all the money and pay Apple nothing" reality is not likely.
Sill, will have to wait for Hoeg's video on that for the details, will probably have more insights on how that could or would work.
Pretty much what I was expecting, both losing is pretty good. Time to watch Tim Sweeney spinning and spinning.
