![]() Given that Epic’s fight with Apple began because of Apple’s 30% cut, it feels likely that Epic would want to take less of a share through its own store (perhaps 12% to match the Epic Games Store on PC). However, some games might be exclusive to only one store.Įpic’s app store could operate like its PC game one, offering developers that use it a larger cut of revenue than other outlets. Think of it like Steam and the Epic Games store on PC, rather than having to download a game from just one store, players are free to use either. ![]() If Epic wins it hopes to be able to launch its own version of the App Store on iPhones. There is a chance that the final verdicts of each Apple vs Epic Games case will maintain the current situation, Fortnite can’t be played directly on Apple devices but other Unreal Engine made games are okay to stay. There’s a lot at stake based on each trial’s outcome. This violation could not only keep Fortnite off iPhone devices if the court upholds Apple’s decision, but could see any game made using the Unreal Engine (the popular Epic Games owned game engine) also removed. The Fortnite developer would like to launch a rival app store on Apple gadgets and open up the opportunity for other non-App Store routes onto the iPhone.Īpple on the other hand is arguing that its platform is fair and that Epic violated agreements it had with Apple by updating Fortnite without permission to circumvent sharing a cut of V-Bucks earnings with them. Epic is arguing that these policies are restrictive and going further to argue that Apple’s walled garden iPhone platform has led to an effective monopoly. The whole #FreeFortnite campaign began due to a protest against the App Store’s 30% cut of purchases made through it. "Epic Games failed in its burden to demonstrate Apple is an illegal monopolist."ĬNET's Lisa Eadicicco contributed to this report.The exact wording of each side's arguments is slightly different depending on local laws for the different regions, but the crux of the Apple vs Epic Games debates is largely the same.Įpic Games has been fairly vocal with its dislike for Apple’s current App Store policies. As a consequence, the trial record was not as fulsome with respect to antitrust conduct in the relevant market as it could have been," Rogers wrote. ![]() In her ruling, Rogers repeatedly said she's worried about Apple's business practices. She hinted at her concerns during court proceedings earlier this year as well, telling lawyers she wanted to hear more argument about anti-steering provisions. "Rather, Epic Games challenged the imposition of any commission whatsoever." "While the Court has found that evidence suggests Apple's 30% rate of commission appears inflated, and is potentially anticompetitive, Epic Games did not challenge the rate," she wrote. Throughout her ruling, the judge took moments to underscore how she was "not persuaded" by Epic's "broad-brush" arguments. While Epic largely lost its case against Apple, Rogers said it didn't necessarily have to. "That's been Democrats' argument - that new antitrust laws are needed to deal with tech platforms' business models"Įpic didn't just take on Apple in the courts, it also started a marketing campaign, #FreeFortnite, and began an advocacy organization called the Coalition for App Fairness. "The core of today's ruling is that Apple is not in violation of federal antitrust law," he wrote in a note to investors Friday. Paul Gallant, an analyst at Cowen, said the ruling may spur lawmakers in Washington to pass legislation that would force app stores to change. "The main thrust of the Court's ruling is that 'success is not illegal.'"īut it may not stay that way. "For Big Tech, there's a sigh of relief because the walls of their gardens will not come tumbling down today, even if this ruling tries to put some cracks in it," said Paul Swanson, a lawyer at Holland & Hart who specializes in antitrust issues. Apple in particular touted its " walled garden" approach - in which it has approved every app offered through its App Store since it opened in 2008 - as a feature of its devices, promising that users can trust any app they download because it's been vetted. Apple and Google have defended their app stores and payment policies, saying their developer guidelines are designed to protect users and to ensure equal treatment of app makers, who've made millions of apps for both platforms combined.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |