Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 614 posts

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#291

Post by kbenson »

valuearb wrote: post #280
kbenson wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m not so sure developers would want the alternative of malware-plagued PCs. We would never even be at the level we're at if there weren't those malware-plagued PCs and their open marketplace of software and operating systems competing with each other. > Previous consumer OSes had major usability and security drawbacks for the average consumer. You mean Windows did, because A) it was the OS of the vast majority of…

There is a huge difference between having your PC not work because of viruses and your phone. Since day one security and safety have been the most important feature for iPhone, and the biggest reason consumers select it.

> Since day one security and safety have been the most important feature for iPhone, and the biggest reason consumers select it.

That's ridiculous. That has nothing to do with the reason people selected it when it came out. It was pretty, it had features no other phone really had, such as a browser that rendered the same as the desktop and good touch controls, but security and safety had nothing to do with it.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#292

Post by DonaldPShimoda »

pier25 wrote: post #172
simonh wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The punitive damages are not for simply breaking the rules, this is made very clear in the filing, they are for knowingly and deliberately breaking them with a full understanding of the legal consequences for doing so.

The punitive damage could as simple as Apple putting you out of business if you rely mostly on your iOS app to survive. We've seen this many times, it's not exclusive to the case against Epic.

Apple is explicitly stating that they retaliated so hard against Epic specifically because Epic (1) asked for permission to break the contract, and then (2) broke the contract when they did not receive permission (even going so far as to send upper Apple leadership a letter informing them of the decision). So Apple's argument is that Epic was deliberately trying to start a big dramatic issue, and Apple wants compensation for being dragged into it.

---

Please note that I have not weighed in on whether I think Apple or Epic is in the right (legally or otherwise). I'm just informing you of their justification, and why they claim this isn't a danger for other developers who may accidentally (or, perhaps, much more minorly) break the terms of service.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#293

Post by bawolff »

bosswipe wrote: post #204
cjoelrun wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't a better analogy that car dealerships deserve revenue for selling Toyota's cars? Running an app store and providing a safe platform for users isn't free right?

Running the only app store and banning all others is less than free, it makes them piles of money in many ways.

Having positive net profit is not the same thing as having no costs or negative costs.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#294

Post by virgilp »

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #279
morsch wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They might resent the app store more if they knew Apple gets 30%. Which is why nobody is supposed to tell.

The 30% cut was literally announced on stage by Steve Jobs when they introduced the App Store in 2008, and again when in-app purchases were introduced in (I think) 2009. It's been in public coverage for years. They talk about it regularly; remember, Apple's position has been to say, loudly and repeatedly, that this is just a terrific deal for everybody. The fees are not secret. Also, remember that in practice, the va…

I don't understand your point. You seem to know that Apple denied an application that was merely stating the "widely known" fact that Apple takes 30% cut; yet you brush that off as irrelevant and "little indication that it's a change in policy"... what policy? The policy of NOT letting users know that Apple takes a cut?

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#295

Post by kbenson »

pjmlp wrote: post #248
kbenson wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If is such a killer app, Epic is free to create their own phone OS, it would sell like hot pancakes. Creating a phone OS wouldn't actually let them compete on the same level, because you can't run anything but iOS on Apple hardware. The only companies that actually compete at the same level as Apple and Google and Amazon, since they both create the hardware, run an OS on it, and provide a store on it. Any while it'…

Replace iPhone with Wii, Switch, Vita, PSP, PS4, XBox, XBox 360....

Yes.

I thought of this the other week, since it's not a stretch to think Epic will want to go after those marketplaces as well if they can.

It feels a little different, but I'm not willing to let that make me a hypocrite. We should have control over that hardware if we bought it, full stop. If that means we can't get those platforms as cheap anymore because they can't recoup their money from store fees, so be it. The world will be better off.

You can't trust any company to have your best interests at heart. You can barely expect this a miniscule amount of the time with your elected representatives, and that's their whole job. The market is for providing competition and innovation. Laws are for providing safety and security (and that includes keeping the market functioning well enough to provide those legitimately). Let's not forget that.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#296

Post by gigatexal »

canofbars wrote: post #218
cf_ wrote: post #203

I really wish there was a third party - the customer - actually represented in this trial. Apple and Epic arguing over what is best for the customer, while clearly they are having their own interests in mind, screams for the actual customers to be represented. The whole argument about them promoting an app „for free“ is a bit ridiculous. They clearly knew the amount of commission they were going to earn from pushing…

The real problem here is that companies are forced to accept apples terms. Because apple controls every level of the stack, to opt out of the App store ToS you have to opt out of the store, the OS, and the hardware. If there was a way to install apps outside of the store this would not be an issue. Most users and developers would still use the app store since it provides value but devs who feel that they can supply t…

I see this argument everywhere and it makes no sense. The ToS is up to the owner of the platform. It's the same reason I don't use Facebook: I think the company and what they do with my data is diametrically opposed to my way of thinking so I voted to leave by deleting my account.

Developer's do have a choice: abide by the ToS and enjoy the trappings of a user base that tends to spend more on applications be they subscriptions or one-offs than Android or vote with your wallets and don't abide by it but to cry foul and try to usurp one's will on the company that built the platform makes no sense.

Some counter arguments:

If the ToS of the app store are likened to the tax laws in the USA then failing to abide the law that requires taxes to be paid is the same thing here as Epic using their own payments system to subvert the iOS tax of 30%.

The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit).

After years of investment in the iPhone and building the ecosystem around it the AppStore is just one way to monetize that. A 30% cut might sound high but they did spend tens(hundreds?) of billions in R&D and this is just one way, among many, that the iPhone is being monetized, this is just a return on investment on top of the sales price of the phone.

All of the arguments I have heard from those in the Epic camp strike me as temper tantrums thrown by children.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#297

Post by chipotle_coyote »

gamblor956 wrote: post #153
simonh wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if stores don’t provide any utility over side loading, how come Epic gave up on relying on side loading on Android, which allows it, and ended up on the Play Store? It’s literally that exact scenario.

Epic still allows Fortnite to be sideloaded. More importantly, Google does not prohibit sideloading. It simply does not make it convenient to do it.

I suspect the OP is referring to the fact that Epic is also suing Google, because they consider the "inconveniences" that Google places on sideloading to be a form of unfair, illegal restriction. This strongly suggests that if Apple offered sideloading but still had the same fees and restrictions in the official App Store, Epic would still be suing them.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#298

Post by fomine3 »

ecf wrote: post #163
bww wrote: post #120

This is a very bad look on Apple. Regardless of the enforceability of their agreements, the sense of entitlement that underlies Apple’s position is shocking. The claim that Epic has “lined [its] pockets at Apple’s expense” implies that Apple deserves to sit in the middle of every transaction that happens on their devices and take a margin. This is the world’s most valuable company we’re talking about here; assertions…

> Maybe next Toyota will decide that they deserve a percentage of Uber’s revenue because Toyota's cars help facilitate Uber’s business? There are many car manufacturers that Uber could choose from in just the same way that there are many platforms that developers can develop for. Stop trying to spread the idea that the ability to make apps for the iPhone is an inalienable right.

ok, the ability to make apps for the iPhone should be an inalienable right.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#299

Post by beaner »

valuearb wrote: post #272
beaner wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They seem not quite the same to me. A game built with Unreal Engine is essentially powered by it and would not exist otherwise. A game deployed to an iPhone could theoretically be acquired through an alternative app store or just direct download. Apple's app store provides no utility to developers other than being the forced walled monopoly that all developers must list through. The proper analogy to Epic charging fo…

The App Store generates nearly 10 times as much revenues for developers per device sold as Google Play. How is building a safer walled garden that attracts the highest spending customers and makes them extremely comfortable with buying apps and subscriptions not a massive amount of utility?

Because if the app was permitted to be installed outside of the app store, it would make more money, meaning the app store offers negative utility to some developers. Fortnite is a huge brand outside of iOS. It iOS did not make the success of Fortnite. Epic doesn't need the app store's advertising to succeed, and being forced to go through this bottleneck only hampers them.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#300

Post by realusername »

gigatexal wrote: post #296
canofbars wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real problem here is that companies are forced to accept apples terms. Because apple controls every level of the stack, to opt out of the App store ToS you have to opt out of the store, the OS, and the hardware. If there was a way to install apps outside of the store this would not be an issue. Most users and developers would still use the app store since it provides value but devs who feel that they can supply t…

I see this argument everywhere and it makes no sense. The ToS is up to the owner of the platform. It's the same reason I don't use Facebook: I think the company and what they do with my data is diametrically opposed to my way of thinking so I voted to leave by deleting my account. Developer's do have a choice: abide by the ToS and enjoy the trappings of a user base that tends to spend more on applications be they sub…

> The ToS is up to the owner of the platform

When there's only two companies fully controlling the next era of computing platforms, there's some argument that they have way too much power in their hand.

> The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit).

Except the phone isn't owned by Apple, and that's why every analogy similar to this one fails.

Post reply on HN