Apple fires back in Epic Games 'Fortnite' saga, seeks damages for breach of contract

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 88
    It can be tiring for some to understand basic concepts that come easy to others. With a rebuttal like “yawn” you show what a powerful force of argument your are (in)capable of. 

    I’m surprised given how smart you think you are that you mistakenly claim I said monopolies are Illegal.  Monopolies are not illegal,  but they are by definition not competitive free markets.  Thus they ARE ultimately subject to regulation or dissolution  in any true free market.

    You know what the difference is between smart people and others?  Smart people don’t reflexively attack an argument that they don’t understand, because that would prove they are not very smart.  At least your response proves something.

    sflocal said:
    dpkroh said:
    Every comment here seems to miss the point.

    *yawn*


    No... you missed the point, or you're changing the narrative to suit your agenda.

    Having a monopoly is not illegal.  An iPhone is both an OS and hardware.  Both go together.  No one else but Apple can make an iPhone.  No one else but Apple can make iOS.  It's a packaged deal.  Clowns like Epic are just vendors, knocking on Apple's door, hat in hand asking to be let into Apple's house hoping to sell its wares.  Nothing more.

    Epic was invited into Apple's house on good terms.  Then, Epic saw how much money they were making (because Android, Xbox, PlayStation, etc.. pays crap) and decided to break an agreement and pocket all the money made in Apple's house.  

    What part of this eludes you?
    sflocal said:
    dpkroh said:
    Every comment here seems to miss the point.

    *yawn*


    No... you missed the point, or you're changing the narrative to suit your agenda.

    Having a monopoly is not illegal.  An iPhone is both an OS and hardware.  Both go together.  No one else but Apple can make an iPhone.  No one else but Apple can make iOS.  It's a packaged deal.  Clowns like Epic are just vendors, knocking on Apple's door, hat in hand asking to be let into Apple's house hoping to sell its wares.  Nothing more.

    Epic was invited into Apple's house on good terms.  Then, Epic saw how much money they were making (because Android, Xbox, PlayStation, etc.. pays crap) and decided to break an agreement and pocket all the money made in Apple's house.  

    What part of this eludes you?

  • Reply 42 of 88
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    I remember a mac world where Nvidia jumped the gun about there great graphic cards that would be the next mac. It ended with Nvidia no longer showing up in a mac officially. Apple has a we will never forget attitude. Apple almost never licenses software from a company that took them to court. It’s often petty on apples part they should be bigger than that but they seldom are. Epic killed it’s golden goose. They might as well move on. 
    Your explanation is incorrect. It is actually Nvidia who has chosen not to support Apple's macOS Metal API in their graphics cards. The moment Nvidia hardware supports Metal, Apple will sign their drivers. Nvidia won't cooperate. I presume the reason Apple wants direct support for Metal is so that the system works faster as a whole, but Nvidia couldn't care less if Macs are slowed down by two levels of driver conversion. I think Apple has the right to insist on efficiency, and since Nvidia won't play ball, but AMD did, Apple was forced to go only with AMD. Now that the new Mac Pro has PCIe slots, it's possible that Nvidia will reconsider their intransigence.
    I think he’s talking about something different. 

    Nvidia bragged about their next card going into the Mac before Apple had announced the Mac. The story goes that Jobs was furious and Nvidia weren’t seen in Macs again for years. 
    fastasleeppscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 43 of 88
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    carnegie said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    carnegie said:
    Is Apple required to let Epic back on the store even if Epic relents and wants to pay 30%?
    The court may order it to, but as of now it has not so ordered Apple.

    Apple has informed Epic that it will deny a reapplication (by Epic) for at least a year. So at this point, Epic doesn't have the option to just undo the hotfix and make Fortnite compliant.
    Have you got a statement from Apple about the year-long ban? This is the se ind time I’ve heard this, and I still can’t find the original link for it. 
    The termination letter which Apple sent Epic was included as an exhibit in one of Epic's court filings.

    https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.364265/gov.uscourts.cand.364265.63.8.pdf
    Thanks. Didn’t know what I was looking for. 

    Yup, one year ban for violations 

    I hope Apple sticks to its guns on that one. 

    watto_cobraanantksundaram
  • Reply 44 of 88
    darkvader said:
    Hopefully Apple will be hit with severe sanctions for filing this frivolous action.  This may even qualify for California's SLAPP law because it's such an egregious and obvious attempt to silence Epic (and ultimately the rest of us).

    This isn't really about Epic.

    This is about MY right to install any software of MY choice on MY iPhone. 

    NOT Apple's iPhone.  MY iPhone.  Apple sold it to me, it's not Apple's any more.  And Apple is illegally denying me the right to run software of my choice on MY iPhone.
    Actually, I don't believe you want ANY of your software on your phone. What you actually want is to MODIFY Apple's OS so that you can have a modified version of macOS. Your goal isn't to jailbreak and replace all of iOS, but to modify iOS to make it do what you want. I don't think Apple would care if you totally replaced iOS with Linux (this is a very important point.) They wouldn't sue you even if you admitted to doing it. What they care about, the only thing they care about, is the modification of THEIR operating system to do unsafe things.

    How would Tesla or Cessna like it if you found a way to hack their vehicle's operating systems to MODIFY their autopilot algorithms so that you didn't have to touch the steering wheel every 15 seconds to prove you were paying attention. I'll tell you, they wouldn't like it. So why aren't you angry with THEM? If you show equal anger against Tesla, maybe I'll consider you more seriously.
    edited September 2020 tobybeaglewatto_cobraDetnator
  • Reply 45 of 88
    carnegie said:
    Is Apple required to let Epic back on the store even if Epic relents and wants to pay 30%?
    The court may order it to, but as of now it has not so ordered Apple.

    Apple has informed Epic that it will deny a reapplication (by Epic) for at least a year. So at this point, Epic doesn't have the option to just undo the hotfix and make Fortnite compliant.
    The court was considering, but rejected, the idea of putting fortnite back on the store with the alternate payment system. It was not considering forcing the product back on the store if the alternate payment system was removed. I was talking about a different scenario entirely. Your second paragraph is a completely new news item to me. I find your point fascinating. I’m going to see if I can confirm that.

    My question remains: can Apple stop a third-party software developer from using the App Store if it simply doesn’t like the developer? Similarly, could Walmart refuse to sell Samsung products just because they don’t like Samsung?
    Well, depends on what you mean by "like". Walmart refuses to carry all sorts of products if the vendor doesn't or can't meet Walmart's requirements. 
    In that case you fully understood my point. Congratulations. Now apply that to Apple.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 88
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    darkvader said:
    Hopefully Apple will be hit with severe sanctions for filing this frivolous action.  This may even qualify for California's SLAPP law because it's such an egregious and obvious attempt to silence Epic (and ultimately the rest of us).

    This isn't really about Epic.

    This is about MY right to install any software of MY choice on MY iPhone. 

    NOT Apple's iPhone.  MY iPhone.  Apple sold it to me, it's not Apple's any more.  And Apple is illegally denying me the right to run software of my choice on MY iPhone.
    Actually, I don't believe you want ANY of your software on your phone. What you actually want is to MODIFY Apple's OS so that you can have a modified version of macOS. Your goal isn't to jailbreak and replace all of iOS, but to modify iOS to make it do what you want. I don't think Apple would care if you totally replaced iOS with Linux (this is a very important point.) They wouldn't sue you even if you admitted to doing it. What they care about, the only thing they care about, is the modification of THEIR operating system to do unsafe things.

    How would Tesla or Cessna like it if you found a way to hack their vehicle's operating systems to MODIFY their autopilot algorithms so that you didn't have to touch the steering wheel every 15 seconds to prove you were paying attention. I'll tell you, they wouldn't like it. So why aren't you angry with THEM? If you show equal anger against Tesla, maybe I'll consider you more seriously.
    I suspect that would be illegal, regardless of Tesla’s license.  You can’t have idiots endangering other road users like that. 

    And I think you’re right. Apple wouldn’t care if you replaced the whole operating system because it’s no longer an iPhone, so if you want to invalidate your warranty then have at it. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 47 of 88
    darkvader said:
    Hopefully Apple will be hit with severe sanctions for filing this frivolous action.  This may even qualify for California's SLAPP law because it's such an egregious and obvious attempt to silence Epic (and ultimately the rest of us).

    This isn't really about Epic.

    This is about MY right to install any software of MY choice on MY iPhone. 

    NOT Apple's iPhone.  MY iPhone.  Apple sold it to me, it's not Apple's any more.  And Apple is illegally denying me the right to run software of my choice on MY iPhone.
    Actually, Apple has proven that Epic has not acted in “good faith”.  Especially since all of Epic’s actions were premeditated and not reactionary. This proves motive of ill intent to try to void a contract illegally. 
    This is why the judge would not compel Apple to restore Epic’s program to the App Store. She noted that Epic harmed themselves by maliciously acting to cut Apple out of their agreed 30%.
    its going to be very hard for Epic to prove that Apple has a monopoly or an unfair advantage because Apple does not compete with Epic, but is a distributor of software for a device they make. Epic has had about a decade to bring up issues of lost revenue, or claims that Apple’s 30% has harmed them, but didn’t because Apple hasn’t. 

    You should read the EULA before setting up your iPhone, because you agreed to the terms and conditions that Apple set forth when you powered it on and accepted them. So next time, don’t buy an iPhone or read the EULA. 
    If you buy a new iPhone and don’t agree to the terms and conditions, the seller is required to give you a refund. 
    tobybeaglepscooter63fastasleepwatto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 88
    I found that the US Supreme Court ruled that Major League Baseball was allowed to be a monopoly because it was just entertainment. Here are some details:
    The US Supreme Court's decision in Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore v. National League (1922)https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/259us200 written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., stated that neither baseball games nor the "personal effort" of players fell under the definition of commerce, and therefore, the business of baseball was not subject to the Sherman Antitrust Act. Baseball, even at the professional level, was recreation and entertainment. It was only a game. Despite numerous legal challenges over the years, the ruling still stands.
    Apple's App store isn't purely about entertainment and recreation, but in this case Epic's Fortnite game certainly is. As I understand the case, the National League engaged in some pretty dirty tactics against a new baseball league and, even so, in the eyes of the US Supreme Court were 100% permissible because it was "just a game". Although the parallels aren't perfect, Apple's tactics could even be just as evil as the National League's, which they are not, and they could probably get away with it because Fortnite is "just a game." I'm not even sure what Epic believes Apple is doing wrong. As this Supreme Court case shows, an entertainment monopoly is not illegal.

    I'm definitely not a lawyer. I took an LSAT test when I was about 18 and it was really tough. My score was high enough to enter only one university in the US. I won't say which one because I don't want to make a joke at their expense.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 49 of 88
    Rayz2016 said:
    I remember a mac world where Nvidia jumped the gun about there great graphic cards that would be the next mac. It ended with Nvidia no longer showing up in a mac officially. Apple has a we will never forget attitude. Apple almost never licenses software from a company that took them to court. It’s often petty on apples part they should be bigger than that but they seldom are. Epic killed it’s golden goose. They might as well move on. 
    Your explanation is incorrect. It is actually Nvidia who has chosen not to support Apple's macOS Metal API in their graphics cards. The moment Nvidia hardware supports Metal, Apple will sign their drivers. Nvidia won't cooperate. I presume the reason Apple wants direct support for Metal is so that the system works faster as a whole, but Nvidia couldn't care less if Macs are slowed down by two levels of driver conversion. I think Apple has the right to insist on efficiency, and since Nvidia won't play ball, but AMD did, Apple was forced to go only with AMD. Now that the new Mac Pro has PCIe slots, it's possible that Nvidia will reconsider their intransigence.
    I think he’s talking about something different. 

    Nvidia bragged about their next card going into the Mac before Apple had announced the Mac. The story goes that Jobs was furious and Nvidia weren’t seen in Macs again for years. 
    I knew he was talking about that, I remember the story, but I was asserting that the actual technical reasons that are currently holding Nvidia back. Reasons can be multitudinous and varied over time. I was stating the main reason that Nvidia currently isn't in Macs.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 88
    “wants to pay nothing”? I guess anything less than 30% is nothing for Apple 
  • Reply 51 of 88

    Rayz2016 said:

    How would Tesla or Cessna like it if you found a way to hack their vehicle's operating systems to MODIFY their autopilot algorithms so that you didn't have to touch the steering wheel every 15 seconds to prove you were paying attention. I'll tell you, they wouldn't like it. 
    I suspect that would be illegal, regardless of Tesla’s license.  You can’t have idiots endangering other road users like that. 

    I would HOPE it would be illegal, but it isn't. https://www.theverge.com/2015/11/4/9670744/tesla-self-driving-autonomous-cars-regulation-oversight -  If Tesla isn't required to submit any code for approval, why should my personally modified Tesla code be required to be submitted? There is no approval process for any software developer for any autopilot on the road. So my question remains open, namely, "What's wrong with me saying that I want to install MY own autopilot software on MY car and NOBODY should be allowed to stop me from doing that!" (a little sarcasm in the tone of voice there.)
    edited September 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 88
    Uninformed opinions?  Well I realize that with just 6 years of top university business education I probably know less about capitalism and free markets than most people here like yourself.   But I thought I would at least give it the old college try. Ya gotta admire my courage right?

    You are correct that monopolies don’t form while markets are free.  The big mistake people make is assuming that free markets are self sustaining.  Nope.  Winner take all capitalism ultimately results in game over, end of the free market. Free markets have to be maintained, by preventing (dissolution) or controlling (regulating] monopolies so the free market can continue to function.

    If you have a basics business school education which if course you do because I am so uninformed, you understand concepts like barriers to entry, and how they are used to destroy free markets by companies that get big enough.

    The European mobile telecom market is far more regulated than that in the USA or Canada.  So by your way of thinking they should have the worst mobile service at the worst prices, right?   But the exact opposite is true.

    The real world is not as simple as blind fundamentalist libertarian ideology wants be believe it is.  I am still sympathetic to the basics of libertarianism,  but results matter most, ideologies at best can be a general guide.....  but I am getting way out of scope here

    Despite differences in our opinions, you do seem educated and informed.  I’m sure we could have a great discussion if we ever met in person.... thanks for chiming in....




    You’ve expressed some extremely uninformed opinions here.

    Monopolies don’t form in free markets. This is simply historical fact. Monopolies form in regulated environments because regulations favor one form of business over another and it is common for regulations to be written in concert with people from the business sector being affected or by politicians who are funded by special interests which benefit from increased regulation.

    Any and all examples of real monopolies which have existed in the US have come about due to market interference and regulation.

  • Reply 53 of 88
    Dang. 

    Go Apple! 

    I’m sick of entitled losers litigating pointless matters to try to get one up on someone else. 

    Epic was in the wrong. They PURPOSELY broke their contract to try to extort and broke their contract. 

    They need to pay restitution, make a public apology, and retroactively pay Apple 30% of whatever pennies they took from the “direct” portion of their app. 
    watto_cobraDetnator
  • Reply 54 of 88
    Never said monopolies are illegal.  Your lament of companies being successful IMHO shows you have by far missed the point. Once a company becomes that successful competition is nearly impossible. Without regulation  a company so large can just buy out any potential competitor.  That’s no longer success by any fair measure, that’s cheating the free market out of existence.

    There are lots of distopian movies about what you seem to think is utopia.... where corporations rule all, and even government itself has collapsed.  The life of citizens has become nearly intolerable but hey.... this is all great right, because society did the right by  not imposing any controls on companies for their “success” ..... yeah for ideology !!




    Rayz2016 said:

    dpkroh said:
    Every comment here seems to miss the point.
    No, you did. Monopolies are not illegal. Never have been. If they were then you’re basically punishing companies for being successful. 




  • Reply 55 of 88
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    Rayz2016 said:

    How would Tesla or Cessna like it if you found a way to hack their vehicle's operating systems to MODIFY their autopilot algorithms so that you didn't have to touch the steering wheel every 15 seconds to prove you were paying attention. I'll tell you, they wouldn't like it. 
    I suspect that would be illegal, regardless of Tesla’s license.  You can’t have idiots endangering other road users like that. 

    I would HOPE it would be illegal, but it isn't. https://www.theverge.com/2015/11/4/9670744/tesla-self-driving-autonomous-cars-regulation-oversight -  If Tesla isn't required to submit any code for approval, why should my personally modified Tesla code be required to be submitted? There is no approval process for any software developer for any autopilot on the road. So my question remains open, namely, "What's wrong with me saying that I want to install MY own autopilot software on MY car and NOBODY should be allowed to stop me from doing that!" (a little sarcasm in the tone of voice there.)
    Well that certainly needs tightening up. You can’t just lump any piece of software in an aircraft, so cars should be the same. 

    When I worked in aerospace, we produced six A4 pages of quality control documentation for every line of code written. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 56 of 88
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    Rayz2016 said:
    I remember a mac world where Nvidia jumped the gun about there great graphic cards that would be the next mac. It ended with Nvidia no longer showing up in a mac officially. Apple has a we will never forget attitude. Apple almost never licenses software from a company that took them to court. It’s often petty on apples part they should be bigger than that but they seldom are. Epic killed it’s golden goose. They might as well move on. 
    Your explanation is incorrect. It is actually Nvidia who has chosen not to support Apple's macOS Metal API in their graphics cards. The moment Nvidia hardware supports Metal, Apple will sign their drivers. Nvidia won't cooperate. I presume the reason Apple wants direct support for Metal is so that the system works faster as a whole, but Nvidia couldn't care less if Macs are slowed down by two levels of driver conversion. I think Apple has the right to insist on efficiency, and since Nvidia won't play ball, but AMD did, Apple was forced to go only with AMD. Now that the new Mac Pro has PCIe slots, it's possible that Nvidia will reconsider their intransigence.
    I think he’s talking about something different. 

    Nvidia bragged about their next card going into the Mac before Apple had announced the Mac. The story goes that Jobs was furious and Nvidia weren’t seen in Macs again for years. 
    I knew he was talking about that, I remember the story, but I was asserting that the actual technical reasons that are currently holding Nvidia back. Reasons can be multitudinous and varied over time. I was stating the main reason that Nvidia currently isn't in Macs.
    Yeah, but that’s not what he was talking about. He was specifically talking about the “jump the gun” event. So he was correct. 
    edited September 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 57 of 88

    dpkroh said:
    Uninformed opinions?  Well I realize that with just 6 years of top university business education I probably know less about capitalism and free markets than most people here like yourself.   But I thought I would at least give it the old college try. Ya gotta admire my courage right?

    You are correct that monopolies don’t form while markets are free.  The big mistake people make is assuming that free markets are self sustaining.  Nope.  Winner take all capitalism ultimately results in game over, end of the free market. Free markets have to be maintained, by preventing (dissolution) or controlling (regulating] monopolies so the free market can continue to function.

    If you have a basics business school education which if course you do because I am so uninformed, you understand concepts like barriers to entry, and how they are used to destroy free markets by companies that get big enough.

    The European mobile telecom market is far more regulated than that in the USA or Canada.  So by your way of thinking they should have the worst mobile service at the worst prices, right?   But the exact opposite is true.

    The real world is not as simple as blind fundamentalist libertarian ideology wants be believe it is.  I am still sympathetic to the basics of libertarianism,  but results matter most, ideologies at best can be a general guide.....  but I am getting way out of scope here

    Despite differences in our opinions, you do seem educated and informed.  I’m sure we could have a great discussion if we ever met in person.... thanks for chiming in....




    You’ve expressed some extremely uninformed opinions here.

    Monopolies don’t form in free markets. This is simply historical fact. Monopolies form in regulated environments because regulations favor one form of business over another and it is common for regulations to be written in concert with people from the business sector being affected or by politicians who are funded by special interests which benefit from increased regulation.

    Any and all examples of real monopolies which have existed in the US have come about due to market interference and regulation.

    You do realize that you, like just about everyone else here, can go to school like a good little boy and still be on the wrong side of right, eh? 

    And your disturbing revisionist history concerning capitalism is hopefully satirical - but realistically just sad. 

    The USA is a capitalistic society and has been since its founding. That has been nothing but a very very good thing. 

    It’s socialism which has proven time and again to drive its people into the ground. Sure, a few prosper wildly, while those not born into positions of power live like paupers, prayed upon by the wackos in their government systems. 

    Regardless, right is still right and wrong is still wrong. Epic purposely breaching contract, hurting Both Apple, its own customers, and trying to strong arm itself into a position of dominance using illegal bully tactics and smear campaigns isn’t going to all of a sudden become “right” anytime soon. 

    It’s sleaze, it’s criminal, and it’s wrong. 

    Not going to end well for Sween. Either he was just trying a stunt to get Apple to buy epic or he really is thst dumb and should be removed from the CEO position stat. 
    watto_cobraDetnator
  • Reply 58 of 88
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    carnegie said:
    Is Apple required to let Epic back on the store even if Epic relents and wants to pay 30%?
    The court may order it to, but as of now it has not so ordered Apple.

    Apple has informed Epic that it will deny a reapplication (by Epic) for at least a year. So at this point, Epic doesn't have the option to just undo the hotfix and make Fortnite compliant.
    Heh. Gets even more interesting. 



    Apple reviews 100,000 submissions per week in 81 languages. 
    Epic has made $600million from iOS
    Apple has sent out 500 million marketing messages for Fortnite. 

    But the last one:

    Apple paid for a billboard in Times Square to promote a Fortnite in-app concert. 

    So the App Store isn’t just an automated system that rakes in money without incurring costs. 

    Who knew?

    tenthousandthingspscooter63fastasleepwatto_cobraDetnator
  • Reply 59 of 88
    Rayz2016 said:
    Because how would gay bakers feel if someone demanded they bake a cake with “homosexuality is a sin” written on the top in fondant icing?
    Why wonder? This kind of thing has already happened many times. Here's one case: 
    https://www.al.com/news/2015/01/baker_refuses_to_put_anti-gay.html ==

    There have been several other cases, and even wording similar to the innocuous "Marriage is between a man and a woman" has been rejected by cake makers in Colorado. Apparently even a very indirect insinuation that being gay might be wrong is now unpurchasable on cakes. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission has opened cases in some of these situations but hasn't done much to help the complainants. In the case in the link above, I can't really complain about the Commision's inaction, but some of the other cases are ridiculous.
    edited September 2020
  • Reply 60 of 88
    Rayz2016 said:
    When I worked in aerospace, we produced six A4 pages of quality control documentation for every line of code written. 
    And I write about one line of documentation for about six pages of code.
Sign In or Register to comment.