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

571–580 of 614 posts

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#571

Post by cafed00d »

saagarjha wrote: post #375
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > A game deployed to an iPhone could theoretically be acquired through an alternative app store or just direct download. > This is false; unless theoretically means there's no concept of "money" involved in our world. I am fairly sure that Apple has already produced a general purpose computing device that also requires applications deployed to it to be compatible with its CPU and to be built using APIs designed and…

Not only that Apple has produced the exact same platform with the same CPU and development tools and APIs as iPhone which it is set to launch later this year where sideloading is completely allowed.

Yep that is true. That doesn't justify that Apple _should_ enable side-loading on the iPhone. Just because they _can_ do it doesn't mean they're _legally, ethically or morally_ obligated to do so.

Ultimately, it's their product. I mean, can you imagine the world we'd live in if some arbitrary group of people (who are _not_ the product developers) decided that the iPod should be opened up to side-load any arbitrary software, such as a music store, run by some other company.

In what world is that legal? Just because the iPhone has majority profits of the smartphone market doesn't mean they ought to share that platform with everyone else. If developers don't like Apple's policies they should not build for Apple's platforms. It's pretty simple.

Go make your iPhone, and App Store, and Retail distribution channels and marketing that works to your specification. Isn't that what competition means?

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#572

Post by inopinatus »

valuearb wrote: post #567
inopinatus wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that works if your values system includes the axiom “whatever Apple spend a lot of money on can’t be wrong.” Even better if you allow yourself to make giant leaps of assumption about the underlying motives. Then it can justify almost any apology for bad behaviour.

Look, you have no counter evidence to the contrary, your tiny study of Korean consumers may or may not say something statistically significant about one small market, but nowhere else. Apple competes with a horde of phone makers who sell cheaper phones at vastly lower profit margins. And who don’t have to spend a dime on OS development. To compete Apple spends enormous effort in keeping iPhone secure and safe. And it…

Excuse me - but you made a wild claim, and have offered no evidence to back it up. A shirty attitude when someone calls this out won't improve the strength of that claim. Belittling the origin of solid research to the contrary doesn't do any favours, either.

Marketing materials are not evidence of consumer preference. If anything, they're potentially the opposite; if people cared so much, why is constant repetition of the message necessary?

Investment levels are not evidence of consumer preference. There are countless strategic reasons why companies spend money in a certain direction.

If you're going to claim that consumers are suddenly factoring device security and relative levels of curation-dependent application safety into their platform selections, in the face of decades of history being incapable of doing so, you'd better be prepared with more statistical power than "they spend a lot of time & money convincing me how insanely great they are".

The final nail in this sorry coffin of corporate malfeasance is that even if consumers did value safety to the extent of choosing one platform over another on that basis, this can never justify actively misleading the consumer and requiring that other parties participate in the same deception.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#573

Post by wayneftw »

wayneftw wrote: post #546
parasubvert wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no problem with new laws to address this behavior. My disagreement is with the belief that existing anticompetitive laws apply to this situation.

Apple has at least 50% of the market in the USA. They have 90% of the youth market so the general market share just keeps growing. You can't have a successful app business without putting your offering in Apple's app store. Our existing anti-trust laws absolutely apply here.

OK, maybe absolutely is a bit strong. IANAL :)

Who knows... we'll see I guess. I don't think Epic will win, but I hope something changes because I just really want to put my own app on my own phone and help my customers do the same.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#574

Post by [deleted] »

deergomoo wrote: post #446
mythz wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple takes 30% off all purchases upfront, and maybe they'll cut you a deal if you're Netflix-size. Netflix, like Kindle & Spotify are "Reader" Apps which pay 0% Royalty. [1] https://www.apple.com/ios/app-store/principles-practices/#:~...

They pay 0% because they don't offer the ability to sign up in the app at all. If they did (Netflix and Spotify have in the past), they have to pay the 30%. To offset this, the price is more expensive inside the app. You can see this with YouTube Premium: £11.99/month via the web, £15.99/month via the iOS app. All the "reader" designation does is allow this off-site option to exist at all, still with the restriction…

[deleted]

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#575

Post by yazaddaruvala »

beaner wrote: post #569
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No data for this exists. This is all my opinion and most importantly feelings about spending money though the AppStore and through any other channel. I will say, for me no other company has built the good will that Apple has. I really doubt that Epic understands the “trust” I speak about. Both because of the general sentiment I see online and as a Fortnite player.

The data for this does exist, it is the fact that Epic does want to offer its game outside the app store, as evidenced by their statements and also by having attempted it for Android.

This answer feels disingenuous. I feel I’ve made my point fairly clearly.

The type of trust building Apple does is a “value add” that a company like Epic doesn’t understand yet.

Epic choosing to make this decision isn’t data about Apple’s ability and mindset to earn trust. Epic choosing to make this decision seems to be a short term play at rent seeking before Fortnite stops being popular.

Also please read my other comments in this thread for anecdata about my experience/feelings as a customer of both Apple and Epic.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#576

Post by valuearb »

inopinatus wrote: post #572
valuearb wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, you have no counter evidence to the contrary, your tiny study of Korean consumers may or may not say something statistically significant about one small market, but nowhere else. Apple competes with a horde of phone makers who sell cheaper phones at vastly lower profit margins. And who don’t have to spend a dime on OS development. To compete Apple spends enormous effort in keeping iPhone secure and safe. And it…

Excuse me - but you made a wild claim, and have offered no evidence to back it up. A shirty attitude when someone calls this out won't improve the strength of that claim. Belittling the origin of solid research to the contrary doesn't do any favours, either. Marketing materials are not evidence of consumer preference. If anything, they're potentially the opposite; if people cared so much, why is constant repetition o…

I thought was arguing with someone rational, but equating marketing with “corporate malfeasance” makes it clear I am not.

Ok, you win. Apple doesn’t know it’s users, they put so much time, effort and marketing behind safety and security, while not understanding that customers don’t care about them.

It’s just random luck that despite being outsold 6-1 that they make more profits off smartphones than all other smartphone companies combined, and pay developers 50% more than any other company in earth. It can’t come from any deep understanding of what their customers want, since you don’t have a statistically viable sample confirming it.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#577

Post by yazaddaruvala »

stale2002 wrote: post #558
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the courts agreed! I agree! If you want to jailbreak your iPhone you can and you should! I even agree Apple should be forced to create more tools to create jailbroken iPhones. However, the warranty should be void. Same as if you use scissors as a hammer, which is your right, the warranty is void. Expecting the original warranty to hold, or expecting the manufacturer to help you misuse the tool is the entitlement.

> expecting the manufacturer to help If their actions are anti-competitive, then they absolutely have obligations, under anti-trust law, which does not require a literal monopoly, and only instead requires significant market power for these laws to apply. Apple is subject to the law. They have to follow it, or they will suffer consequences.

If then yes. But it seems unlikely and my preference is to live in a world where Apple continues to curate the AppStore on my behalf.

I hope Apple doesn’t need to remove the AppStore entirely. But that would definitely be better than the alternatives of allowing sideloading.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#578

Post by stale2002 »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #577
stale2002 wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> expecting the manufacturer to help If their actions are anti-competitive, then they absolutely have obligations, under anti-trust law, which does not require a literal monopoly, and only instead requires significant market power for these laws to apply. Apple is subject to the law. They have to follow it, or they will suffer consequences.

If then yes. But it seems unlikely and my preference is to live in a world where Apple continues to curate the AppStore on my behalf. I hope Apple doesn’t need to remove the AppStore entirely. But that would definitely be better than the alternatives of allowing sideloading.

> If then yes.

This is the entire point of the lawsuit and the debate.... That Apple's action were anti-competitive. You haven't actually given any reason as for why thats not true.

> where Apple continues to curate the AppStore on my behalf.

They will still be able to do that. They simple won't be allowed to make it extremely difficult for alternative app stores to be installed on the iPhone, if another user chooses to do so, if and when the lawsuit is resolved.

You will still be perfectly allowed to continue to not install any other app stores that you don't want installed on your phone.

> I hope Apple doesn’t need to remove the AppStore entirely

They won't. Instead, as long as it is simple and easy for competitors to install apps stores on the iPhone, then the anti-competitive arguments will go away.

> than the alternatives of allowing sideloading

If you don't want to install competing app stores, then don't install them. Its pretty simple. Your rights are not infringed on, if Apple is forced to allow people who are not you, to install competing app stores.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#579

Post by manicdee »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #187
manicdee wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic, however, takes 5%..... after you pull in $1mil in revenue. That's it. That's it, for now. Epic is trying to set themselves up as publisher like Steam. Once they can get first-party status as an app store on iOS their tune will change. This is about money, and one way to make money is to get people hooked on your product then jack up the price.

Let's persecute everyone for the crimes they might commit in the future.

At what point does "nip it in the bud" turn into "you're persecuting me for crimes I haven't committed yet"?

I suspect that where the line is drawn depends on what benefit you feel you get from one side of the line versus the other.

Re: Apple countersues Epic, seeks punitive damages

#580

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

manicdee wrote: post #579
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's persecute everyone for the crimes they might commit in the future.

At what point does "nip it in the bud" turn into "you're persecuting me for crimes I haven't committed yet"? I suspect that where the line is drawn depends on what benefit you feel you get from one side of the line versus the other.

You're right:

Nipping it in the bud was wiped clean off the table the moment Trump won the Republican Party presidential nomination for a second term..

As far as I'm concerned, now, it's a complete free-for-all.

Post reply on HN