davidw

shaneg said:

Apple_Bar said:

Keep showing Epic TRUE colors! 

What an #EpicFail...

Apple is looking to ban Epics developer account on the 27th, which will ban all of Epics apps on the app store.   Plus that will also effect Epics Unreal Game Engine for iOS developers.   Apple is going out of their way to punish Epic now.    That to me is Apple being a bully.   Google also banned Epics Fortnite game app from the play store, but Google is not going to ban Epics developer account for Android apps.

Its also showing Apples true colors.

Apple going to revoke Epic developer license has more to do with just Epic violation of Apple App Store policy with their Fortnite app. That only got Fortnite banned from the Apple App Store. As it did the Google Play Store. But Apple discover that Epic has committed  several other violation of their developer license and sent Epic this letter. Which in parts read ........ 

>Upon further review of the activity associated with your Apple Developer Program membership, we have identified several violations of the Apple Developer Program License Agreement. Therefore, your Apple Developer Program account will be terminated if the violations set forth below are not cured within 14 days. [...]

If your membership is terminated, you may no longer submit apps to the App Store, and your apps still available for distribution will be removed. You will also lose access to the following programs, technologies, and capabilities: ..........

We hope that you are able to cure your breaches of the Apple Program License Agreement and continue to participate in the program.<

I'm sure that if Epic had violated other aspects of their developer license with Google, Google would also be forced into a position where they will give Epic a warning and a chance to remedy it, before revoking their license. Having Fortnite in the Play Store means even less to Google, than it does to Apple. 

kmarei said:

hammeroftruth said:

ITGUYINSD said:

hammeroftruth said:

qwerty52 said:

This new fact confirms what there is behind Epic’s shouting and crying about Apple’s monopoly and about absence of freedom in AppStore.

Money, money and ones again money!

There really wasn’t any question about it. If Epic could have shown they have been damaged by paying Apple 30%, then they might have a point in this lawsuit. What they have shown is that Apple made them a lot of money and took care of the hosting, billing and bookkeeping for Fortnite for 30% of billions. 

Those poor bastards. 

Hosting?  Apple doesn't host the game servers.  They host the server where a tiny app lives that Apple forces Epic customer to download from.  That's it.  Once downloaded, Apple's job is done.  Why should Apple get 30% for "billing and bookkeeping" when Epic is perfectly capable of doing that itself if not for the fact that Apple forces them to go through Apple and pay 30%?  I wonder how many bookkeepers in the companies of the world get 30% of the companies revenue (not profit, but gross revenue)?  I'd venture a guess of practically NONE.

To be fair, Epic should charge $1.99 for the app, and Apple gets 30% of that.  Then, all the IAP's are through Epic payment systems since Apple has nothing to do with that.  

I was referring to hosting the App. Imagine how many times a day Fortnite was downloaded during the peak of popularity, plus whenever there is an update. That costs money and resources. 

The reason why is they AGREED to it. The App Store was created for any developer to make an app. That’s why Apple takes care of those issues. So a mom and pop developer doesn’t spend a ton of money on hosting their app, processing their payments, and breaking down what taxes they need to submit. Just because Epic is big enough to do it itself doesn’t justify breaking the agreement. 

Your handle implies that you work in IT, so if you do, let’s put it this way. 

Some IT specialists get several hundreds an hour for their work. Sometimes, they only need to work less than an hour, but their agreement states they get paid a minimum of let’s say 3 hours. Is that fair? Well, yes, that’s what their employers agreed to. 

People can download the game directly to their android phone from the fortnite servers with zero issue 
so it’s not like fortnite couldn’t do this on their own, and it was Apple that provided this service for them.
it’s not like Apple gave them all this exposure and made then the most popular game on the planet, they were huge before the iOS version came out.
only reason it’s on App Store, is Apple forced them to, if they went to access iPhone users

its exact like buying camera from amazon 
and then amazon saying you HAVE to buy your memory cards from them
and give them 30% marku

 Fortnite is a free app and can be played for free on iOS and Android mobile devices. It cost Epic nothing for this. But can you play Fortnite on the Epic server using an iDevice, Android device, X-Box, Playstation and Switch, without Apple, Google, MS, Sony and Nintendo help? Who makes it possible for Epic to make money selling virtual goods for real money, to the Fortnite players on X-Boxes, PlayStations, Switches and mobile devices? 

This has nothing to do with Fortnite being the most popular game on the Earth, it has to do with Epic wanting to make more money selling virtual goods, for real money, from their most popular game in the World and wanting to make sure Fortnite remains the most popular game in the World for as long as possible. You actually think Apple needs Fortnite in their App Store to justify their $2T valuation? 

Fortnite became the most popular game in the World, even though Epic paid MS, Sony and Nintendo a 30% cut. 71% of Epic Fortnite players are on game consoles and the 30% cut they are still paying to MS, Sony and Nintendo, didn't stop them from becoming the World most popular game. If Epic had balked at paying MS, Sony and Nintendo a 30% cut, would they be the most popular game in the World today? Would they be making more money because they didn't have to payout a 30% cut? No one is forcing Epic to be in the Apple App Store or Play Store or any of the game console for that matter. 

You're wrong, iOS and Android Fortnite players do not have to buy their v-Bucks from the App Store or Play Store. They can buy their v-Bucks online with a PC or Mac. Or buy a gift card from a retailer. However, when a mobile player buy or spend their v-Bucks, while playing Fortnite on iOS or Android, Apple and Google will take a 30% commission on their purchase cost and Epic will keep a 70% cut. A player can buy a 'cool" 2000 v-buck ($20 real dollars) virtual outfit on a PC or Mac, Epic would not have to pay the 30% cut and the player can wear it while playing for free on any platform. The other platforms do not get any of the 30% cut. But any V-Bucks purchased from any of the game consoles, stays with that game console. But the items they buy, moves with them no matter what platform they play on. 

And remember, the players as the purchaser of virtual items in the Fortnite Store are not the one paying the 30% cut, Epic has to pay it. If a player buys 1000 v-Bucks (for $9.99 in real money) they still have 1000 v-Bucks to spend on virtual items in the Fortnite Store. It's Epic that pays the 30% cut for the privilege of accessing gamers that will convert real money to V-Bucks, in order to buy virtual items. And that is worth the 30% cut they pay.

It's really no different than advertisers paying Google a premium, for targeted ads to Google's "customers". So all this BS about buying a car and having to buy gas from the car maker or buying a camera from Amazon and having to buy memory cards from Amazon is just that, BS. Epic is the one paying the 30% cut and they are not the buyer. They are the seller and if they want to sell virtual items for real money to iOS or Android players, they need to pay for that privilege. Just like the seller of the camera on Amazon pays Amazon a commission. And the going rate is a 30% cut. If Epic thinks their players are paying too much for virtual items with real money, they can lower the price of their virtual items or give more v-Bucks per real dollar. . By all account, they are doing just fine selling virtual items to the 88% of Fortnite players on the other platforms. Barnum was right.  

AppleInsider said:

..........

Apple has defended its decision, saying it "won't make an exception" for Epic to skirt App Store rules. The tech giant promises to terminate Epic's developer account and cut off its access to iOS and Mac development tools, a move that would prohibit Epic from updating the Unreal Engine on which many iOS and Mac games are built. Epic this week requested a temporary restraining order to stop Apple from following through with its threat.

Once again, that is not entirely accurate. Most news site are only reporting what Epic is saying. And epic is lying or at the very least, not telling the whole truth. And its doing as much as possible to paint Apple as the only bad guy in all this. Very few sites are reporting what is actually happening.

Epic is claiming that Apple will be terminating their developer license over their App Store violation of linking to an outside source to buy Fortnite V-bucks at a discount. Plus that Apple is retaliating against them for no other reasons. All Apple did for this violation was to ban Fortnite from the Apple App Store. As did Google from their Play Store.

The threat of terminating Epic developer license stems from other violations that Apple discovered, after Fortnite was already banned.

In a letter they sent to Epic, which few sites publishes or even mention, Apple gave the reasons for their action in terminating Epic developer license and the letter was not about Epic violating the Apple App Store agreement by including an outside link to buy V-bucks at a discount with-in the Fortnite app.

this from macrumor     https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apple-threatens-to-terminate-epic-games-developer-accounts-on-august-28.2250375/

The letter Apple sent reads .....

>Upon further review of the activity associated with your Apple Developer Program membership, we have identified several violations of the Apple Developer Program License Agreement. Therefore, your Apple Developer Program account will be terminated if the violations set forth below are not cured within 14 days. [...]

If your membership is terminated, you may no longer submit apps to the App Store, and your apps still available for distribution will be removed. You will also lose access to the following programs, technologies, and capabilities:

- All Apple software, SDKs, APIs, and developer tools
- Pre-release versions of iOS, iPad OS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS
- Pre-release versions of beta tools such as Reality Composer, Create ML, Apple Configurator, etc.
- Notarization service for macOS apps
- App Store Connect platform and support (for example, assistance with account transition, password reset, app name issues)
- TestFlight
- Access to provisioning portal for certificate generation, and provisioning profile generation
- Ability to enable Apple services in-app (i.e. Apple Pay, CloudKit, PassKit, Music Kit, HomeKit, Push Notifications, Siri Shortcuts, Sign in with Apple, kernel extensions, FairPlay Streaming)
- Access to Apple-issued keys for connecting to services such as MusicKit, DeviceCheck, APNs, CloudKit, Wallet
- Access to Developer ID signing certificates and Kernel Extension signing certificates 
- Developer Technical Support
- Participation in Universal App Quick Start Program, including the right to use the Developer Transition Kit (which must be returned to Apple)
- Engineering efforts to improve hardware and software performance of Unreal Engine on Mac and iOS hardware; optimize Unreal Engine on the Mac for creative workflows, virtual sets and their CI/Build Systems; and adoption and support of ARKit features and future VR features into Unreal Engine by their XR team

We hope that you are able to cure your breaches of the Apple Program License Agreement and continue to participate in the program. <

i have yet to see a site that has what the letter listed as the violations that Apple stated Epic must correct. Of course, maybe bringing a suit against Apple, might be a violation of the Apple developer license agreement that can get you license revoked. 

elijahg said:

mike eggleston said:

OutdoorAppDeveloper said:

Two problems:
1. Epic never asked for an exception. They asked for the rules to be changed.
2. Apple makes that very same exception for its own products.
You can always tell if someone is in trouble when they start answering questions no one asked.

There is zero difference between that and Amazon selling their Amazon Essentials on their site, or Walmart selling "Great Value" in their stores.

I'm not sure there's much weight to the 30% argument for Apple's own apps, but I think there is regarding the rules Apple applies to developers versus itself. The difference between products on Amazon and the App Store, is iOS developers have no choice but to use the App Store for iOS apps. You are correct in that Apple selling their own apps is the same as Amazon selling Amazon Essentials items on their site. However, iOS developers *have* to sell their apps on the App Store. They can't sell their app in the Google Play store because it's not compatible. People making coffee machines or whatever don't *have* to sell their coffee machine on Amazon's store, they can sell them in Walmart, direct, eBay, whatever. If they don't like the markup Amazon charges, they're free to go elsewhere. iOS developers can't go elsewhere. Saying they can go to the Google Play store is an entirely false equivalence because they can't just sell the same product at the Google Play store without rewriting the whole thing. Yes they can use cross-platform APIs to assist this, but cross-platform iOS apps are pretty crap.

A better equivalence would be BMW forcing every customer to buy all spares and accessories through them, and anyone making any kind of spare part or accessory for any BMW has to sell through BMW, and BMW charging the manufacturer 30% for the privilege. Want a phone holder? Got to go through BMW. Need a new thermostat? Got to go through BMW. As it is now, people can replace parts on their car with compatible third party parts (equivalent to sideloading apps on iOS/Android) and that's their risk. People are aware of this risk and are usually willing to take it even if it's their life on the line (unlike the risk with iPhone sideloading, where the worst that can happen is you get malware) - because the risk is so low it's worth it.

You analogy fails in this regard. You do not buy or ever own, iOS.

An iDevice owner do not have to buy an Apple case. Nor an Apple charger. Nor an Apple cable. iDevice owners can install a non Apple battery, either my themselves or by a third party. They do not have to buy Apple made accessories from Apple.  Amazon sells them and at a discount. There are plenty of replacement parts for Apple iDevices on eBay, that are not made by Apple. And there are plenty of Apple made stuff that iDevice owners can buy from retail outlets, other than an Apple store. So where is this .... iDevice owners have to buy everything for their iDevice, from Apple or made by Apple?

As far as Apple is concern, you can use your iDevice solely as a paperweight or door stop. Apple has no say in this because the iDevice owner owns the hardware. But iDevice owners DO NOT own iOS. Thus Apple still has a say on what gets loaded on to it and from whom. When an iPhone owner agree to the EULA, part of it states that Apple agrees to provide upgrades, updates and to maintain iOS on that iDevice, for it's useful life. 3 years of upgrades and 5 years of updates are not uncommon. And Apple will honor their part, even if the iDevice owners sells or give away their iDevice. And Apple will do their best to recover the data or repair iOS on their devices, even if the owner screwed up and somehow corrupted iOS. That's because Apple still owns iOS, even if they don't own the iDevice it's on. Therefore Apple have a stake in seeing that iDevice owners do not screwup by installing malware or programs from sites not under Apple's control, that ends up corrupting iOS on their device.   

Google is not in the same position in this regard. Google only provide Android and all its updates and upgrades to the device makers and the device makers are responsible for upgrading, updating and maintaining Android on their devices. That's  because the device makers customizes the Android that ends up on their devices. So if an Android user install malware from an app not from the Google Play Store, it's not on Google. It's on the maker of the device or the entity that provided the app. When was the last time you saw a Google Store where someone can bring in their bricked Android device and have Google try to repair the OS that has been infected with malware? If this were the case, Google would not allow Android users to side load apps from outside the Google Play store. Imagine how long the line would be otherwise.  


When one buy an iDevice running iOS, it's like buying a Costco membership. Costco members can only buy what Costco sells in their stores. Costco members can not demand that Costco sell products that are only available at Walmart, because this would say them money. Best Buy can not demand that Costco allow them to set up a store inside a Costco or even in the parking lot, on the premise that Costco members will be better served if they have more choices from whom to buy products from. If a Costco member want to buy a product that Best buy sells and not offered at Costco, then that member can go to the nearest Best Buy. If they want to pay Walmart cheaper prices, then they can shop at Walmart.

If you have a product you want to sell to Costco members, like auto insurance, (and Costco offers to sell for you), be prepared to pay Costco a commission for the privilege of having access to Costco members. You think Costco should be forced to allow LensCrafters to set up a shop inside a Costco, that will compete with Costco own eyeglasses lens store, because not doing so would be abusing the "monopoly" Costco have in determining what products they sell in their stores, to their own members?          

tenthousandthings said:

Apple said:

 ... We won't make an exception for Epic because we don't think it's right to put their business interests ahead of the guidelines that protect our customers.

... If Apple moves forward with its planned course of action, Epic will no longer be able to update the Unreal Engine ... Epic filed a temporary restraining order to halt Apple's escalation, saying the iPhone maker "is attacking Epic's entire business in unrelated areas."

So, basically, Epic’s strategy assumed Apple would not ban them as a developer. I wonder if this is standard practice for developers who purposely try to circumvent the in-app rules, or if it is an exception.

If it is an exception, it’s funny because Epic wanted Apple to make an exception for them, and they will have. Just not the exception they wanted!

If it is not, and this is standard practice, then it just shows how ill-considered the whole gambit has been.

What Epic did with Fortnight to bypass Apple in app paying method, did not result in Apple saying that they will pull Epic developer license at the end of the month. All Apple did was to ban Fortnight from the App Store. 

Apple discovered Epic was violating several other rules of their enterprise developer license and informed Epic that their license will be pulled unless they remedy it by the end of the month. There has been no mention of what those violations entails. Or at least I haven't found any source with detail about those other violations. But my guess is that it's on the scale of what Facebook did in violation of Apple Enterprise Developer license, when the allowed non employees to side load a data mining app. 


Apple threat of pulling Epic developer license is a separate issue, but Epic is making it seem that Apple is threatening to pull their developer license over what they did with updating Fortnight to bypass Apple in app paying method. And that is not true. All Apple did was to ban Fortnight from the App Store, until Epic fixed Fortnight to conform with the App Store rules. Like they would do with all apps that didn't conform to App Store rules. One does not lose their developer license just because they had an app that didn't conform to the App Store rules. How would Apple expect you to fix the problem than got your app banned, if they took alway your developer license and the use of the tools needed to fix the problem?