Apple enlists Gibson Dunn to fight Epic Games suit, law firm previously retained in Samsun...
Apple is once again turning to the lawyers at Gibson Dunn in its bid to fend off a private antitrust suit leveled by Epic Games, with initial proceedings set to begin next Monday.
According to a court docket electronically filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Apple is being represented by Daniel G. Swanson and Richard J. Doren. Swanson is a senior figure in Gibson Dunn & Crutcher's Antitrust and Competition Practice Group, while Doren is a member of firm's executive committee.
As noted by FOSS Patents, which reported on the case development on Tuesday, Gibson Dunn often represents Apple and interested parties in court, including high-profile cases like the second Apple v. Samsung action and the Apple v. Qualcomm patent licensing battle. The latter case saw Gibson Dunn attorneys counsel Apple's contract manufacturers, who were roped into the fight when they refused to pay royalties on Qualcomm's intellectual property.
Interestingly, the same firm that represented Qualcomm in the now-settled dispute, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, now squares off against Apple as counsel to Epic Games, the report notes.
Epic last week baited Apple into removing popular battle royale game Fortnite from the App Store by issuing an update that incorporated a direct payment option. Bypassing in-app transaction mechanisms is a clear violation of both Apple and Google's online stores, and in response the tech giants pulled the title from circulation. Epic had a pair of lawsuits -- and in the case of Apple, a corresponding PR campaign -- ready to go.
Apple on Monday doubled down on its position by promising to terminate Epic's developer account by Aug. 28 if the firm failed to fall in line with App Store guidelines. The move would impact Epic's access to SDKs, meaning the company's Unreal Engine would also be rendered unusable for hundreds of third-party iOS and Mac apps that rely on the software to function. Epic in response requested a temporary restraining order to stop Apple from following through with its threat.
The case is scheduled to be heard via teleconference on Monday. FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller notes Epic might be asked to explain why one aspect of the TRO against Apple, specifically App Store availability, is not also being pursued in its case against Google.
According to a court docket electronically filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Apple is being represented by Daniel G. Swanson and Richard J. Doren. Swanson is a senior figure in Gibson Dunn & Crutcher's Antitrust and Competition Practice Group, while Doren is a member of firm's executive committee.
As noted by FOSS Patents, which reported on the case development on Tuesday, Gibson Dunn often represents Apple and interested parties in court, including high-profile cases like the second Apple v. Samsung action and the Apple v. Qualcomm patent licensing battle. The latter case saw Gibson Dunn attorneys counsel Apple's contract manufacturers, who were roped into the fight when they refused to pay royalties on Qualcomm's intellectual property.
Interestingly, the same firm that represented Qualcomm in the now-settled dispute, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, now squares off against Apple as counsel to Epic Games, the report notes.
Epic last week baited Apple into removing popular battle royale game Fortnite from the App Store by issuing an update that incorporated a direct payment option. Bypassing in-app transaction mechanisms is a clear violation of both Apple and Google's online stores, and in response the tech giants pulled the title from circulation. Epic had a pair of lawsuits -- and in the case of Apple, a corresponding PR campaign -- ready to go.
Apple on Monday doubled down on its position by promising to terminate Epic's developer account by Aug. 28 if the firm failed to fall in line with App Store guidelines. The move would impact Epic's access to SDKs, meaning the company's Unreal Engine would also be rendered unusable for hundreds of third-party iOS and Mac apps that rely on the software to function. Epic in response requested a temporary restraining order to stop Apple from following through with its threat.
The case is scheduled to be heard via teleconference on Monday. FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller notes Epic might be asked to explain why one aspect of the TRO against Apple, specifically App Store availability, is not also being pursued in its case against Google.
Comments
And had Apple taken gaming seriously a decade ago they would have wiped Epic from the face of the Earth. I wanna see Apple create a unified Apple Engine for game developers.
Now it's biting them in the ass though. Like when Google stole iPhone technology and used Google Maps as leverage.
Anyway, losing the Mac userbase is very little concern for Epic, it's probably less than 1% of their revenue. However, it means a *lot* of the Mac games will vanish and will have a lot more effect on Mac users than Epic. A lot of Apple Arcade games are built with the Unreal engine too. In fact almost all the best and most impressive games on AA (i.e. not rehashed versions of the crappy mobile style games that make up 80% of the App Store just with the IAPs removed) are built with UE - and Epic was quick to support Metal with UE. Losing the UE from the Mac and iOS would be a massive blow to Mac and iOS gaming, and ultimately could cause a shift to Android for people who game heavily on iOS.
More and more these days Apple is acting like a bully and it doesn't sit at all well with me. Or the regulators, apparently. It wouldn't be so bad if they actually did something with the money they're raking in rather using it as a platform to spout pious rhetoric from.
Apple’s global image as an immersive, unavoidable megalomane incumbent is at stake.
The 1984 reference hit an open nerve - Epic simply isn’t the main target anymore
I hope we all live long enough to see the very end of this case. Hearings, trial, appeal, appeal of appeal.