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

421–430 of 614 posts

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#421

Post by 8note »

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.

Code is copyrightable, so it's speech no? If I want to write code that can be run on an iPhone, I have an inalienable right to do so.

I'd say you also have an inalienable right to repair and modify things that you own, and that includes running code on computers you own, like the iphone

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#422

Post by simion314 »

danielheath wrote: post #350
simion314 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is a good thing, competition between this stores is good for the users, some users got free games, some developers got better deals. The "needs to launch on startup" is FALSE , you can have this launchers set no to start at all and you launch the game and the launcher will start if needed (not all Steam games need Steam in background). FYI GOG launcher is optional, you can just download the game from the web…

It's not a good thing that I need 6 stores installed to play the games I've bought, each with their own updater pulling several gigabytes a week off the net just to keep the store app up-to-date. I'd be interested to see whether any jurisdiction would hand down a consumer mandate for unbundling the DRM component from the storefront app; the former only updates occasionally.

Better to have the option of 5 stores that you can launch when and if you want then only have a Windows/Apple Store that will have more expensive games, will censor stuff based on "american values", will DRM shit so you can't say swap a .dll with something that works better(some old games that work bad on Win10 can be fixed by using a different directx.dll), you could not mod the games - basically you are telling PC people that a console is the best thing because it has 1 small advantage but it fucks you in 12 different ways(more expensive stuff and no freedom)

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#423

Post by 8note »

pjmlp wrote: post #145
kbenson wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Epic was able to install their own app as a store (what they actually want), they would have at least a few tens of millions of users to start with (there's 116 million iOS Fortnite players). Epic's in the fairly unique position of having a "killer app" that a large portion of the iOS user base would want to install to get the ball rolling on a competing store. Given their rates a much better than Apple's, I imagi…

If is such a killer app, Epic is free to create their own phone OS, it would sell like hot pancakes. You know, actual innovation.

I'm not clear why app store competition should be determined by phone features?

The choice between fortnight and a good camera seems like a strange one.

Why couldn't Netscape have just made their own computer, instead of relying on windows boxes?

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#424

Post by chinathrow »

inopinatus wrote: post #54
Traster wrote: post #44

The thing that really annoys me about this entire argument is that the principal of the thing isn't really controversial. Apple provides a tonne of services (SDKs, marketplace, payment processing) that other people also provide and also charge for. It's not that controversial - in fact, Epic's Unreal Engine has the exact same revenue share terms as Apple. The only thing that's really controversial here is that 30% is…

Sorry to flatly contradict you, but the size of Apple’s cut is not at all controversial. It has never been a crime to be expensive. The legal controversy is that Apple prohibit apps from advertising, linking to, or even mentioning that external account management/payment/service sign-up options are available. This forces vendors to become complicit in misleading the consumer about their options, an anti-competitive p…

> Sorry to flatly contradict you, but the size of Apple’s cut is not at all controversial. It has never been a crime to be expensive.

Of course it's controversial. Why should 30% be acceptable? Why not 50% or 70%? Or only 5%?

If you look at the app store revenue done by Apple and if you would be able look at the true cost of running it, one can agree that the huge markup is a racket.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#425

Post by 8note »

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....

There's plenty of competition in terms of stores for all those things, except iPhones.

For instance, you can buy games for your switch from amazon or best buy. They have no such restriction where you can only buy games through Nintendo's store

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#426

Post by pjmlp »

saagarjha wrote: post #378
pjmlp wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pennies, when compared with console devkit prices.

Surely there are not 27 million console developers?

No, because the money stakes to get into the console development game party is much higher than iOS, which apparently Epic is happy to pay for.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#427

Post by andy_ppp »

dep_b wrote: post #413
andy_ppp wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> Epic itself cannot do it for less than 12% What makes you think this? How do you know they cannot do an App Store for less than 12%? Also there is such a thing as economies of scale - the app store probably sells many times more things than the Epic version. You seem to mistakenly think the cost of selling X items on an App Store has a cost that is "cost of app store per thing" * "number of things sold". This isn…

> What makes you think this? How do you know they cannot do an App Store for less than 12%? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games_Store "Epic Games had settled on a 12% revenue cut for titles published through the store" > This isn't true, the cost of the App Store is fixed and has almost NOTHING to do with number of things sold. OK so you say the whole % of sale model is completely wrong and people should just pa…

I am tempted to give up but let's maybe explain one more time:

1) The value that Epic have decided to charge for an App Store has nothing to do with the costs of running an App Store.

2) I said no such thing about a fixed fee - I said your mental model for understand the costs of selling something on an App Store is mistaken. Once the store exists your costs are largely fixed, I don't need to explain it to Epic - they do not represent my views and they can charge what they want on their app store.

3) Why do you think hosting costs loads of money - it's virtually free at the scale of Epic or Apple? It has nothing to do with the charges and each sale.

4) I explained what I think is fair for Apple - be grateful for the huge developer community and stop trying to charge people for content built outside of each app (i.e. you can't buy books on the amazon app or audible due to this stupid profiteering). You can't even purchase Netflix from the Netflix app due to Apple wanting a cut.

Anyway, I think I've tried to explain why you're not correct about the maths on the value/costs App Stores create for Apple and running them like a protection racket due to market dominance is ethically wrong.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#428

Post by jpambrun »

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…

That's not very fair. The main value of the App store is that it is the only store.

Let other store on iOS, then we will see which one provide the best value.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#429

Post by pjmlp »

harpratap wrote: post #393
pjmlp wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One cannot buy a house besides a landing lane and then complain planes are taking off and landing all day long. If iOS doesn't offer what they want, don't buy Apple, plain and simple, there is nothing more to discuss and the judge will set this straight.

In developed countries there are laws preventing sale of properties where noise may be so high that it's detrimental to one's health. So if the competition in market is hurting the merchants or consumers, it should be rightfully outlawed.

The market is mobile phones, get a device not produced by Apple and be done with it.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#430

Post by pjmlp »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #411
dr_dshiv wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also have the choice to avoid smartphones altogether. What they want, though, is the ability to use apple hardware and non-apple software. The only reason they can't is because Apple won't let them, unless they pay a 30% commission

Apple owns the marketplace on their platform. When they undermine competing payment systems using their monopoly power then they appear to be acting anticompetitively in a manner that is against the consumers best interest. This is only an issue when they use their monopoly power to undermine consumer interests.

Consumers get their apps, there is no undermining taking place.

Maybe I should complain that Sony abuses the PS4 market so I can't run Switch titles on the PS4.

Post reply on HN