Apple v Epic - App store shenanigans

[pmbug]

An appeals court on Monday mostly sided with Apple over its App Store rules in a suit with Epic Games.

The decision signals that Apple's control over the App Store and the fees it charges likely won't significantly change as a result of an ongoing legal challenge by Epic Games.
...
Epic sued Apple after the game company introduced its own payment system into Fortnite, which broke Apple's rules and ultimately got the company banned from the App Store. It culminated in a weekslong trial two years ago in California where Apple CEO Tim Cook and Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney testified.

Monday's ruling in the Ninth Circuit Court affirmed the decision that primarily found Apple did not violate antitrust law by banning competing app marketplaces on iPhones.
...
However, the iPhone maker did lose one claim and had to allow developers to place links inside their apps so users could make purchases outside the App Store.

The appeals court did not overturn that decision, which was related to California law, and is the one claim that Apple says was not decided in its favor. Whether the company is forced to allow links to outside payments will be determined in possible future hearings.

Apple said in its statement that it was considering further action, which could include an appeal to the Supreme Court. ...

Apple declares 'resounding victory' after decision reached in Epic Games appeal

An appeals court on Monday mostly sided with Apple over its App Store rules in a suit with Epic Games.

www.cnbc.com

Apple is not a free market zone.

 

[pmbug]

Different case, but related:

Google is headed back to court for its second antitrust trial in two months, this time in defense of its Android Play Store.

While Google continues to argue against monopoly claims brought by the Department of Justice and a bipartisan group of states in Washington, D.C., District Court, the company now has to simultaneously face off against Epic Games in a federal court in San Francisco.

The trial involving Epic, which begins Monday, revolves around Google's treatment of third-party mobile developers, and will be closely watched by Apple, which operates the rival iPhone App Store. Both companies have been accused by developers of taking an unfair cut of revenue from in-app payments and for making it harder for app creators to communicate with their customers.
...
For the Epic suit, there's one key difference between what Google faces and the case against Apple. Google allows “sideloading,” or the ability to install software off the web, which Apple forbids.

Epic plans to argue that, even with that capability, Google abuses its dominant market position and makes it hard for consumers to get access to apps, according to a person familiar with the matter.
...

More:

Google faces off with Epic Games as it enters its second antitrust trial in two months

Google's trial against Epic follows the game publisher's lawsuit against Apple, which went to court in 2021 and was appealed earlier this year

www.cnbc.com

 

[Goldhedge]

Sounds like putting GM parts on a Ford.

 

[pmbug]

Not quite.

Google maintains an App store for Android mobile devices. Apple maintains an App store for Apple mobile devices. Companies that want to distribute their apps on either platform have to contract with Google/Apple.

Epic Games contracted with both to distribute their Fortnite game. The Fortnite game has an in-game store to let players purchase in-game items. Google/Apple contracts forbid/restrict apps from selling anything outside of Google/Apple's app stores. That restraint wouldn't be a big deal if Google/Apple didn't have an effective monopoly on their respective platforms, but they do.

 

[Casey Jones]

Sounds like putting GM parts on a Ford.

Not quite.

Google maintains an App store for Android mobile devices. Apple maintains an App store for Apple mobile devices. Companies that want to distribute their apps on either platform have to contract with Google/Apple.

Epic Games contracted with both to distribute their Fortnite game. The Fortnite game has an in-game store to let players purchase in-game items. Google/Apple contracts forbid/restrict apps from selling anything outside of Google/Apple's app stores. That restraint wouldn't be a big deal if Google/Apple didn't have an effective monopoly on their respective platforms, but they do.

The trouble, as I see it, is that these tech companies, controlled by autistic geeks, don't understand the responsibilities that various businesses have to their customers.

Ford, for example, has no business telling its customers WHERE they can take their Ford cars. Or what roads, or kinds of roads, they take. If there were a device installed to shut off Fords, dead, on the road, if they crossed into Mexico - or Florida - people would be outraged.

But this is essentially the moral plank that Apple management, post-Jobs, has taken. It not only wants to keep its code secret and closed-source (understandable if perhaps unwise) but it worries about what KINDS of business or activities various suppliers, of apps, peripherals, even media programs, are available even if only listed.

Not hosting pornographic material is one thing - that's generally-understood "decency." But using nebulous terms like "Hate" to ban movies, books, podcasts that are personally disagreeable to the sodomite moralist, Timmy Cook...that's a bridge too far.

And it's why I'll have nothing to do with that company and the autistic, morally-twisted deviants running it.

Unfortunately, others in the tech industry don't have that choice.