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

Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 151 posts

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#41

Post by zigzag312 »

I hope Epic succeeds. Apple has managed to create a virtual ecosystem and they have absolute control over it. Yes, they did it by creating a great product at the right time (at the rise of much improved telecommunications technology). With a combination of HW, OS and digital store they created more than just a product, they have created a platform. Based on that platform, with a big contribution from third party developers, a virtual ecosystem has grown. Today, true value is in this whole ecosystem. And that is the point. Third party developers combined have probably contributed more man-hours/resources than Apple alone to increase the value of this ecosystem. Why should Apple have a total control of this ecosystem when they created only a part of it?

Take away the apps/services not created by Apple and the value of the platform drops considerably. Whole market is in a big catch 22 position. It is nearly impossible to compete and create a new smartphone platform, because even if a new player creates superior products compared to Apple, they don't have all the apps. They can't create the whole ecosystem by themselves, as the costs would be insane. Software developers also don't have much choice. There are two platforms that control all the market share. They have to accept the rules given to them or leave the industry (one they helped create).

Saying things like that every developer agrees to the App Store rules before releasing their applications is a major oversimplification of a complex situation. Apple can change the rules and they might not be the same at the time when developer makes an major investment to develop an app and when they release it. And rules might change again after they release it.

Apple did not create this whole virtual ecosystem, just the platform on which it is build upon. And this ecosystem has outgrown Apple. It's got so big, that Apple's contribution is only a part of it. Apple has been generously repaid for their efforts, and will continue to be so in the future. But maybe they shouldn't have a complete control over a virtual ecosystem this big, where their investments no longer represent the majority of it's value.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#42

Post by thehappypm »

Animats wrote: post #19
thehappypm wrote: post #13

I find it hard to side with anyone but Apple here. Apple built not only the marketplace but the actual devices themselves. Apple is giving developers a marketplace of users with powerful processors, fast internet connections, and credit cards already connected. Installing an app is easier on a smartphone than any desktop. A big cut is well worth deserved, and the contract terms seem pretty fair. I can't see how Epic…

That argument is like the railroad antitrust cases of a century ago. "The New York Central Railroad is giving shippers a marketplace of users with large freight terinals, fast locomotives, and railroad sidings already connected. A big cut is well worth deserved, and the contract terms seem pretty fair." (If you think Comcast is bad, read up on the history of railroad monopolies.)

It's really not like that. The railroads were monopolies. Apple is far from a monopoly -- they're just the platform that rich people like.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#43

Post by reificator »

judge2020 wrote: post #30
mdorazio wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really the core of the argument here. Epic is arguing that Apple's terms themselves (taking a cut of the revenue that's a direct result of Epic's team's efforts with zero options to do anything else) are not fair and should be unenforceable given its market position. Basically, breach of contract is only a valid legal basis when the contract itself is deemed legally acceptable. Ex. you can't force someone…

> that's a direct result of Epic's team's efforts Apple’s case is arguing (at least in part) that no, epic could not have made all of that money if Apple didn’t first put a hundred billion dollars and 10 years worth of investment into iPhone and iOS.

> Apple’s case is arguing (at least in part) that no, epic could not have made all of that money if Apple didn’t first put a hundred billion dollars and 10 years worth of investment into iPhone and iOS.

Given the runaway success on every other available platform, I'm going to have to say that's not true at all. IANAL.

Epic is trying to bring the product to the customers that want it, and if the App Store and iOS hadn't existed but everything else was mostly the same, then those iOS users would simply be using Android or another similar product.

Apple's investment in the platform benefited many (including Google and Android) but in this case Apple doesn't bring anything to Fortnite that other platforms don't. It's just the users Epic is after.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#44

Post by intricatedetail »

judge2020 wrote: post #31
intricatedetail wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should charge Apple for wasting courts time. Imagine someone had legitimate case but had to wait for their turn as Apple clogged the court. Utterly disgusting.

This is why court fees exist, there’s always a losing side so almost any case could be interpreted as the losing side “wasting the court’s time”.

Apple has virtually unlimited money, so fees are irrelevant.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#45

Post by cassteri »

Osiris wrote: post #38
cassteri wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand what an analogy is, I also understand that not all analogies are valid, usually when the pretence is so heavily flawed that the analogy crumples. The analogy must be coherent, but a country and company are as alike as a fish sandwich and a turd. The usefulness of the analogy is stretched to the point of uselessness as it is here.

> a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification. the dictionary definition of the word analogy does not include those stipulations that you stated. Any explanation that compares two things meets the definition of analogy. I think you're being pedantic. You can disagree with the comparison, but that doesn't mean it can't be called an analogy.

My parent comment states the analogy is useless, not that it can’t be called an analogy. It’s an analogy, just not a logically coherent one.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#46

Post by cptskippy »

felipellrocha wrote: post #6
storkhill wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I think Apple's in the right here. Every developer agrees to the App Store rules before releasing their applications. Apple created guidelines for their developers and they're simply taking advantage of that in court. Not saying I agree with it, but it doesn't go without reason.

Same. I don’t like Apple’s overreach in the industry, over all, but their apple store service is great, and they should be paid for it. Don’t wanna pay? Don’t go to the store.

The counter argument is that Apple has structured the deal so that you can't avoid the store. Additionally if you're in the store, Apple forbids you from advertising cheaper alternatives to in-app purchases.

So basically if you want to sell on Apple, you must give Apple a 30% of all sales on the platform AND you're not allowed to tell users they can purchase your wares via alternatives.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#47

Post by silicon2401 »

medium_burrito wrote: post #21
jaywalk wrote: post #3

While I admire the creativity of Apple's legal team to attempt to frame this as theft, I'm glad it was dismissed outright because it's beyond absurd.

There should be a Nobel Prize for lawyers- awarded for the most ridiculous tortured or absurd legal arguments made with a straight face - maybe name it the Cochran prize in honor of the Chewbacca defense.

I once read about a lawyer who argued that a person's name could not be used in court because they first heard their own name from someone else, thus it was hearsay. I'm probably butchering the hilarious story, but if anyone knows what I'm talking about, I'd hugely appreciate a name I can look up or more info on it.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#48

Post by AnthonyMouse »

thehappypm wrote: post #40
intricatedetail wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said you side with Apple, but why? Better analogy is that Apple is a country with a single party, no elections, that dictates who can make money and how much tax they pay. These ecosystems need regulation to enable multiple stores and open APIs.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Apple a country.. there's alternatives out there and nobody is forcing you to use an iPhone, which is vastly different from a country, where you are forced to abide by its laws and pay its taxes. It's almost an absurd analogy. If I was to make an analogy, I might say Walmart is a better analogy. Walmart is the biggest store in town, but you do have alternatives and nobody is fo…

> there's alternatives out there and nobody is forcing you to use an iPhone

In what way is this different than a country or a state? Nobody is forcing you to live in California, you could sell your house and get a different job and a different social cohort and move to Florida. Nobody is forcing you to use an iPhone, you could sell your phone and replace all your apps and convince everyone you know to switch away from iMessage.

> where you are forced to abide by its laws and pay its taxes.

How are you distinguishing the app store rules and fees from laws and taxes?

> Walmart is the biggest store in town, but you do have alternatives and nobody is forcing you to shop there, even if it's kind of hard not to.

Walmart doesn't own all the real estate for a hundred miles and then prohibit anyone else from building a store that people who shop at Walmart could reasonably patronize. They don't condition your use of their store on buying their car, which in turn refuses to let you drive to any other store, so that if you want/need any product from Walmart you have to get every product from there.

> Their markup? Pretty similar to Apple's fee, roughly 25%.

For a brick and mortar store which is paying for local real estate, physical inventory and human cashiers, none of which Apple does and yet they're still charging higher fees.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#49

Post by pwinnski »

stale2002 wrote: post #16
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where you come down on this issue should really be based on whether you think a marketplace cut of revenue with extremely onerous conditions that prevent even minor bypasses should be legal or not when distribution on said marketplace constitutes 50% of the consumer market in the sector This is a court case. Not a legislative session. Where you come down on it should be based on the law. I believe the law should be…

> Where you come down on it should be based on the law. The comment that you responded to included facts that would support the idea that Apple's behavior is against the current law. When they said that " said marketplace constitutes 50% of the consumer market" This is a reason as for why Apple is breaking the law. It is an argument that Apple has significant market power, and is engaging in anti-competitive actions,…

What courts will need to decide is what constitutes a "market."

The arguments against Apple all seem to hinge on the market being "people who own iOS devices," while the argument in favor of Apple all seem to hinge on the market being "people who own a smartphone."

In one of those, Apple is a monopolist. In the other, Apple isn't even the biggest company.

Re: Judge dismisses Apple’s “theft” claims in Epic Games lawsuit

#50

Post by MeinBlutIstBlau »

thehappypm wrote: post #13

I find it hard to side with anyone but Apple here. Apple built not only the marketplace but the actual devices themselves. Apple is giving developers a marketplace of users with powerful processors, fast internet connections, and credit cards already connected. Installing an app is easier on a smartphone than any desktop. A big cut is well worth deserved, and the contract terms seem pretty fair. I can't see how Epic…

This wouldn't be an issue if Apple wasn't taking a flat cut of 30% off of everything. It doesn't matter what they provide. 30% is like a government level tax. That should just scream how much influence and power Apple has if they can charge something so egregious.
Post reply on HN