Epic Games takes Apple dispute to Australian market regulator

Posted:
in General Discussion
Epic Games has taken its App Store legal dispute with Apple in Australia to the country's market regulator, according to a new report.

Credit: Epic Games
Credit: Epic Games


The "Fortnite" maker has told the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission that Apple's "unrestrained market power" is suppressing competition and innovation, and is artificially raising the price of iPhone and iPad apps, Financial Review reported on Thursday.

According to its submission to the ACCC Digital Platforms Services Inquiry, Epic Games says that Apple is forcing App Store developers to pay a 30% "Apple tax" on the games they sell. It adds that the true commission should be closer to the single digits.
"Apple's conduct is symptomatic of unrestrained market power that results in significant harm to Australian consumers and the competitive process. In the absence of these anticompetitive restraints, app developers would have a greater ability to distribute their apps, leading to increased competition and innovation to the benefit of Australian consumers," Epic's submission reads.
The ACCC was already investigating whether Apple and Google abuse their power in their respective app stores. Epic Games had previously praised the ACCC for investigating App Store market power.

Epic Games sued Apple in Australia's Federal Court in 2020, alleging that the App Store breached multiple sections of the Competition and Consumer Act and the Australian Consumer Law.

That lawsuit claimed that Apple illegally "forces Epic (and other app developers) to only use Apple's App Store to distribute its software applications to the broad base of iOS device users, and to only use Apple's payment platform for purchases of their in-app content by iOS device users."

Apple in December 2020 asked the Australia Federal Court to toss out the lawsuit because Epic Games had promised to settle any disputes and litigation in the U.S.

Epic Games launched its campaign against Apple in 2020, after baiting the company into removing "Fortnite" from the App Store with the implementation of a direct payment system that bypassed Apple's own. That payment system was a violation of Apple's App Store guidelines.

The initial litigation, filed in the U.S. in 2020, is still ongoing. Earlier in February, a judge ruled that Apple CEO Tim Cook must undertake a seven-hour deposition in the case, which is slated to go to trial in May.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 22
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,166member
    Epic doesn’t like the story of the little red hen
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 22
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,016member
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 22
    darkvaderdarkvader Posts: 1,146member
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 4 of 22
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 2,316member
    I think 2 points don't help their case.
    The Big banks with all the political connection they have lost repeatedly trying to get Apple to open access to NFC hardware to run their own card systems on the iPhone.
    ACCC backed Apple on the security of customer data.

    There is consumer action pending with the ACCC over Epic et al Loot crate business model as being gambling aimed at underage consumers.

    So Epic need to prove their anti-consumer business model warrants a reduction of consumer protection to a body whose mandate is to improve both those things.

    lolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 22
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,166member
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Perhaps you could explain the bit where Apple has a monopoly? It has less than 20% of the phone market. 
    To do what you want the easiest way is  you could buy a phone using the operating system with the largest market share which does it fact allow what you want.

    edited February 2021 mac_dogKTRGeorgeBMacwilliamlondonfotoformatDogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 22
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    You don’t have to like their policy, I don’t.  But is it your job to break them and denying right away?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 22
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 1,069member
    entropys said:
    darkvader said:

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone...
    …To do what you want the easiest way is  you could buy a phone using the operating system with the largest market share which does it fact allow what you want.
    A much better way to say this than I had planned. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 22
    All these petty, bottom-feeding, thankless bozos -- Epic, Snap, even Google and Facebook. Apple has enabled and enhanced their revenues, their business models, allowing them to get to where they are. 

    If it weren't for us -- Apple's high-valued customers relative to that of other platforms -- these folks wouldn't be who they are, nor would they be going after the company. Perhaps we all should do our part, however little, to use them less. I started with Samsung's products (e.g., TVs, displays) a while ago, and I am going to consciously start on these. 
    edited February 2021 fotoformatDogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 22

    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Tough. Find another platform where you can do that. It's not like that doesn't exist. 
    KTRGeorgeBMacwilliamlondonfotoformatDogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 22
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,050member
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Then jailbreak YOUR iPhone. What's stopping you? Not Apple. I believe every version of iPhones can be jailbroken, even the iPhone 12.

    Instead of crying all the time about how Apple won't let you download apps from the internet, on to YOUR iPhone, jailbreak YOUR iPhone. It's not that hard to do. What is stopping you?  It's YOUR iPhone and you can do what ever you want with it. You don't need Apple permission or their help? You don't need Apple to provide you with a switch to flip, to do this. You can do this of your own choosing.   

    Epic shouldn't be your hero, your heroes should be the people that write jailbreaking software and Cydia that provides a third party app store for jailbroken iPhones. They allow you do with YOUR iPhone, what Apple won't help you to do, install apps from sources, other than the Apple App Store. And you won't have to ignore any pesky warnings when installing apps from the internet, on a jailbroken iPhone.

    Custom car fanatics do this all the time. Want to install wider tires on your car, than what the factory body permits? Bring your car to a custom body shop and cut the fenders out, to allow wider tires. It's your car. You can do it yourself if you have the tools and skill. The car makers are not going to stop you. Only don't expect them to honor any warranty on your suspension, when you do this.

    I did this with a sunroof. One of my first used auto I bought, didn't have a sunroof and it was never a factory option. You know what I did? No, I did not go on some car forum and cried about it. I took a metal cutting jigsaw, cut a hole in the car's roof and installed a sunroof. (Granted it was a pop up version and not one that can fully slide open.) I could have easily paid a custom bodyshop do it for me, but I saved on the labor by doing it myself. 

    Now, go and jailbreak YOUR iPhone and then come back here and tell us what we're all missing with OUR un-jailbroken iPhones.  
    edited February 2021 Dogpersonwatto_cobrabeowulfschmidt
  • Reply 11 of 22
    applguyapplguy Posts: 235member
    Who remembers when you’d buy software/games and just use/play them without any further investment? I miss the days of inserting the cartridge or disc and splaying a game. Now games and software are released broken or short of features because they can continuously update fixing bugs along the way. It can be a horrible user experience. 

    As for Epics argument. Why just Apple? PlayStation and Xbox both have in game purchases that can’t be bought outside their stores. As far as I am aware also at 30%. I think this is a test by Epic with their least valuable platform to challenge the 30% for leverage with the previous mentioned stores. 
    williamlondonentropyswatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 22
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Australia, in recent years, has shown itself to be even crazier than Epic.   They should make a good team.
    williamlondonentropys
  • Reply 13 of 22
    croprcropr Posts: 1,124member
    entropys said:
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Perhaps you could explain the bit where Apple has a monopoly? It has less than 20% of the phone market. 
    To do what you want the easiest way is  you could buy a phone using the operating system with the largest market share which does it fact allow what you want.


    Apple has a monopoly on the distribution of iOS apps.   The impact for the consumer is limited, he has the choice to buy an Android device, but is for the app developers the impact is huge. An app developer (and I am one) has no choice and would commit financial suicide if he neglected the iOS customer base.  So whether he likes it or not, he has to accept the Apple Developer guidelines.   This is not an issue for the technical related guidelines (look and feel, security, ....) but it is a big issue for the business related guidelines.   E.g. can somebody explain to me why I can't give a customer who bought an app from me, a discount on one of the other apps I have developed.  
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 14 of 22
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    And if Apple added that switch and you completely screwed up your phone and had your identity stolen because you installed malware from a shady App Store, would you expect Apple to fix it? Would you sue Apple because they are responsible for YOUR phone’s functioning and didn’t  stop malware from the other store?  Apple has every reason to run the store the way they do and if you don’t like it, go with another operating system. 
    JinTechDogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 22
    JinTechJinTech Posts: 1,022member
    j2fusion said:
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    And if Apple added that switch and you completely screwed up your phone and had your identity stolen because you installed malware from a shady App Store, would you expect Apple to fix it? Would you sue Apple because they are responsible for YOUR phone’s functioning and didn’t  stop malware from the other store?  Apple has every reason to run the store the way they do and if you don’t like it, go with another operating system. 
    My thoughts exactly. What people constantly fail to see, or are just brainwashed to see otherwise is that, Apple's "walled garden approach" is actually for your benefit. Even some of the biggest techie friends that I have who have Android phones, complain about malware on their phones and when I ask them how they got it, they have no response. 
    Dogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 22
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,050member
    cropr said:
    entropys said:
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Perhaps you could explain the bit where Apple has a monopoly? It has less than 20% of the phone market. 
    To do what you want the easiest way is  you could buy a phone using the operating system with the largest market share which does it fact allow what you want.


    Apple has a monopoly on the distribution of iOS apps.   The impact for the consumer is limited, he has the choice to buy an Android device, but is for the app developers the impact is huge. An app developer (and I am one) has no choice and would commit financial suicide if he neglected the iOS customer base.  So whether he likes it or not, he has to accept the Apple Developer guidelines.   This is not an issue for the technical related guidelines (look and feel, security, ....) but it is a big issue for the business related guidelines.   E.g. can somebody explain to me why I can't give a customer who bought an app from me, a discount on one of the other apps I have developed.  
    And Microsoft has a monopoly on the distribution of games for their X-Box. Sony has a monopoly on the distribution of games for their Playstation. Game developers can also say that it would be financial suicide if they were to neglect either of those platforms. And yet, developers would have to fully follow Microsoft and Sony guidelines, if they want to develop games for the X-Box or PlayStations. And the only way to distribute their downloadable games is through the Microsoft Store or Sony Store on their respective platform. 

    The only way to get apps on to an iDevice is through the Apple App Store and its always been this way since 2008. Following the introduction of the iPhone in 2006. If the App Store is a monopoly that is subject to anti trust laws, then why haven't the government done something about it by now? And why haven't Microsoft or Sony been subject of any anti trust violations for their gaming platform stores?  

    It' funny how people say that Apple has a monopoly with iOS when iOS is just the platform iDevices runs on. You never hear people saying Microsoft have a monopoly with the platform that the X-Box runs on or that Sony has a monopoly with the platform that the PlayStation runs on. Of course Apple, Microsoft and Sony are going to have a monopoly with the platform they created, own and maintain, for the devices they sell. But none of the devices they sell are a monopoly in the market they are in.  

    iOS is not a market. Apple do not sell or market iOS. The people that buy iDevices is the market. And the iDevice they buy are not a monopoly in the mobile device market.

    Look at it this way. Microsoft has a monopoly with Windows, not because they have full control of their Windows platform and developers have to accept their guidelines if they want to write software for Windows. Microsoft has monopoly with Windows because Windows in a monopoly in the computer OS market, with over a 90% share of it.

    iOS in not a monopoly in the mobile device OS market. So Apple do not have a monopoly with iOS. Even if they are the sole distributers of apps on it. Saying so was the same silly argument that Epic used to justify their lawsuit against Apple for having a monopoly with their App Store and the judge told them they better come up with a better explanation than that, as that kind of logic could apply to nearly every company selling products they created and own, as having a monopoly. 

    Costco has full control of what products their paying members can buy in a Costco Store. They have a monopoly on the distribution of products their members can buy in their stores. Any company wishing to sell their products to Costco members must go through Costco and follow Costco guidelines. And BTW, if Costco does decide to distribute the product in their stores, they will get a cut of every product sold to their members. A company can not open their own store inside a Costco and bypass Costco guidelines, to sell their products, just because Costco has a monopoly as to what their members can buy inside a Costco. It's Costco own store, just as it's Apple iDevice, Microsoft X-Box and Sony PlayStation.  
    edited February 2021 Dogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 22
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,093member
    darkvader said:

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Posts like yours really come across as childish, petty, and heavy on the whining.

    Of course Apple has a monopoly on the iPhone.  That doesn't mean it's illegal.

    Of course you "own" your phone.  You're welcome to do whatever you want to do with it.  Run it over with your car as far as I'm concerned.  Jailbreak it to you heart's content and side load anything you want.  Just don't come crying to Apple if some rogue app you installed suddenly bricks your phone.  I'm sure you'll blame Apple instead of your own ignorance.
    anantksundaramDogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 22
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,166member
    cropr said:
    entropys said:
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Perhaps you could explain the bit where Apple has a monopoly? It has less than 20% of the phone market. 
    To do what you want the easiest way is  you could buy a phone using the operating system with the largest market share which does it fact allow what you want.


    Apple has a monopoly on the distribution of iOS apps.   The impact for the consumer is limited, he has the choice to buy an Android device, but is for the app developers the impact is huge. An app developer (and I am one) has no choice and would commit financial suicide if he neglected the iOS customer base.  So whether he likes it or not, he has to accept the Apple Developer guidelines.   This is not an issue for the technical related guidelines (look and feel, security, ....) but it is a big issue for the business related guidelines.   E.g. can somebody explain to me why I can't give a customer who bought an app from me, a discount on one of the other apps I have developed.  
    You keep using that word, but it does not mean what you think it does. By your definition, streets has a monopoly on magnum ice creams. 

    Not. A. Monopoly.
    anantksundaramwatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 22
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 2,316member
    cropr said:
    entropys said:
    darkvader said:
    sdw2001 said:
    As much as I am deeply concerned about the power of Big Tech (the recent actions of FB, Twitter, AWS, Google  and Apple stand out), I continue to think Epic doesn’t have a leg to stand on here.  The developer clearly and intentionally violated the terms of service to make a point. As the article stated, they baited Apple into taking the action they did.  I don’t see how they are going to make a credible argument that Apple’s system has “driven up prices.“  Apple does not have a monopoly on smart phones. They are a major market player and they have their own system. If you want to use their system, you’re going to play by their rules.  They will claim, with quite a bit of credibility, that their system protects users, overall quality, and has led to a massive number of relatively low cost apps.  Is the developer actually going to argue that they have a *right* to have their software installed on Apple’s product? Like it’s some kind of public service or common carrier?  That argument has a lot more merit for the social media companies, and we’re not even there yet with them.  I continue to believe this is going nowhere for Epic.  

    Apple absolutely has a monopoly in a major segment of the market. 

    And it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  All Apple needs to do is add a preference to allow installing apps from any source of my choosing.  They can put whatever dire warning on it that they'd like, they just don't have the right to keep me from flipping that switch.

    Epic are doing this for their own greedy reasons, but they are still heroes for doing it.
    Perhaps you could explain the bit where Apple has a monopoly? It has less than 20% of the phone market. 
    To do what you want the easiest way is  you could buy a phone using the operating system with the largest market share which does it fact allow what you want.


    Apple has a monopoly on the distribution of iOS apps.   The impact for the consumer is limited, he has the choice to buy an Android device, but is for the app developers the impact is huge. An app developer (and I am one) has no choice and would commit financial suicide if he neglected the iOS customer base.  So whether he likes it or not, he has to accept the Apple Developer guidelines.   This is not an issue for the technical related guidelines (look and feel, security, ....) but it is a big issue for the business related guidelines.   E.g. can somebody explain to me why I can't give a customer who bought an app from me, a discount on one of the other apps I have developed.  
    Actually they don’t. You and any developer are free to use the best available functionality of webApps to deliver your experience to customers. Apple can’t stop you, don’t do anything at all other make the platform better for you to develop on. You’d be entirely free to use another device and get a similar experience. Seek revenue by Apple or non Apple means. 

    Oh but not as visible so not as trusted so not as active. Apple could make a web App Store to improve trust but then you’d be arguing they should open it up because they have created a monopoly of customer trust. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 22
    davidw said:
    And Microsoft has a monopoly on the distribution of games for their X-Box. Sony has a monopoly on the distribution of games for their Playstation. 
    No, in fact, they do not.  One can buy X-Box and PlayStation games in many different places.
Sign In or Register to comment.