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

131–140 of 151 posts

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

#131

Post by aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA »

silicon2401 wrote: post #47
medium_burrito wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Maybe you’re thinking of the frivolous legal tactic of sovereign citizens to assert that when their name appears in all caps in court documents, it does not refer to themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman_theory

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

#132

Post by dwild »

FDSGSG wrote: post #106
heavyset_go wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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). To put this in perspective consider these stats. In the US, iOS has 52.4% of the mobile OS market[1], and Android has 47%. In the US, Apple's App Store is responsible for the majority of mobile app sales[2], and has 3…

Given how much higher the iOS app sales are, it seems like Apple is providing very significant value for that 30% cut of theirs

You realize how your argument could apply to any monopoly right? They were able to get 100%, they have to provide significant value to reach that ;). Sadly it's more complicated than the size of their market.

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

#133

Post by dwild »

ethbr0 wrote: post #90
Barrin92 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Related point maybe worth bringing up, imagine if Windows had complete control over the distribution of videogames when the industry was in its infancy? Would we ever have gotten some of the more controversial games at the time that have become genre defining like Doom or Wolfenstein? And would we be better off if all game studios would have to pay 30% to Microsoft? It's ridiculous. We grew up with the (relative, bef…

One huge subterranean component of this that we don't talk about -- we have overengineered platforms. In the pre-90s, you bashed things out of the same primatives everyone else had access to. Now, even getting a simple app up and running on Android or iOS requires abstraction-on-abstraction-on-boilerplate. And you still don't know what the lower layers are doing. And making it runnable requires a developer account, e…

> Now, even getting a simple app up and running on Android or iOS requires abstraction-on-abstraction-on-boilerplate. And you still don't know what the lower layers are doing.

And there's plenty of people ready to write theses abstraction in the open source world.

> Are we surprised these days that kids (and everyone else) don't see "writing an app" as something they can just try?

It's just as easy and I see just as many kids trying than before. There's millions apps on the

> And making it runnable requires a developer account, etc.

Sure that's definitely not an artificial barrier added to control what gets made... You don't need one to develop on Android by the way ;), nor do you need one on Windows... Linux... Mac... well actually only iOS come to minds, any other?

> And that the end consequence of that is that they don't value the ability to do so?

The consumer aren't aware of that, most of them doesn't want to makes apps, most of them doesn't know the barrier added actually affect their ability to access content.

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

#134

Post by pwinnski »

stale2002 wrote: post #95
pwinnski wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> In the other, Apple isn't even the biggest company. Actually Apple would be the biggest company, in the market of people who have smartphones in the US. They just recently have a bit over 50% of that market. Also, Apple does not need to be a literal, singular company for its actions to be illegal. Instead, it only needs to have significant market power. It doesn't even need to have a majority of the market. > the a…

This is my point exactly. What the judge in each case has to determine is how best to define the market. Whether "smartphone owners" or "devices that play videogames" or "App Store users" or "iOS devices" or "computers" or "phones" or any number of other ways. Do you determine it in the US only, or world-wide? (US courts have jurisdiction only here, but can determine a market based on any parameters) Do you determine the majority player based on units, or gross revenue, or profits? Is your primary concern when it comes to damages companies (like Epic) or end users? And so on.

People are blithely making cases here like all of these things are simple, but they're the key to this and all other similar cases, and it's not as clear as people seem to assume. Different judges might decide different things on different days, and none are necessarily wrong... or right!

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

#135

Post by lawtalkinghuman »

mhh__ wrote: post #128
medium_burrito wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

IANAL but isn't this prize (in the extreme) called disbarment?

That's reserved for the only true mortal sin in legal practice - fucking around with client money.

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

#136

Post by lawtalkinghuman »

horsawlarway wrote: post #60
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…

I say this bluntly - You sound like an apple fanboy who has no idea what the current state of software distribution is on most platforms. That aside - You're missing the forest for the trees. No one is saying Apple is not providing a service, no one is arguing that they shouldn't be able to charge what they want for that service. Everyone is saying that it's bullshit that Apple is the only service you can pick if you…

> Why is it fair for apple to arbitrarily prevent the installation of any competing distribution methods?

Same reason it is fair for Nintendo to not allow Sony to sell Switch games, and Sony not to allow Nintendo to sell PlayStation games.

Their circus, their monkeys.

> Apple has said "Nice store you've spent all that money building, such a shame we've decided we won't allow you to use it on an iPhone."

Epic also can't put the Epic Store on Switch or PlayStation. Strange how there's no hand-wringing about that.

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

#137

Post by kevincox »

lukasfischer wrote: post #126

Would you agree on a 10% App Store fee? Or 15%? Or 5%?

In my mind the problem isn't the fee. It is that Apple decides what you can run on your hardware.

They could charge 80% as far as I am concerned as long as there was the possibilities to get apps another way (and ideally run alternate stores).

Of course this is my opinion and a major reason that I am not an Apple customer.

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

#138

Post by mhh__ »

lawtalkinghuman wrote: post #136
horsawlarway wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this bluntly - You sound like an apple fanboy who has no idea what the current state of software distribution is on most platforms. That aside - You're missing the forest for the trees. No one is saying Apple is not providing a service, no one is arguing that they shouldn't be able to charge what they want for that service. Everyone is saying that it's bullshit that Apple is the only service you can pick if you…

> Why is it fair for apple to arbitrarily prevent the installation of any competing distribution methods? Same reason it is fair for Nintendo to not allow Sony to sell Switch games, and Sony not to allow Nintendo to sell PlayStation games. Their circus, their monkeys. > Apple has said "Nice store you've spent all that money building, such a shame we've decided we won't allow you to use it on an iPhone." Epic also can…

A Nintendo Switch or PlayStation is not the modern equivalent of a PC for much of the population.

If you ignore all context, then yes, an iPhone is exactly the same as a games console.

> it is fair

Is it fair? To the companies or the consumers? These are all huge multinational companies, regulation should err on the side of the end users - not Epic either.

> Their circus, their monkeys.

Your choice of words is perhaps an argument for freedom given how the life a circus monkey is.

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

#139

Post by mhh__ »

d1zzy wrote: post #108
horsawlarway wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this bluntly - You sound like an apple fanboy who has no idea what the current state of software distribution is on most platforms. That aside - You're missing the forest for the trees. No one is saying Apple is not providing a service, no one is arguing that they shouldn't be able to charge what they want for that service. Everyone is saying that it's bullshit that Apple is the only service you can pick if you…

So what exactly does Epic want here? To force Apple to sell iOS (with configurable/multiple stores) as separate software that you might install on a separately iOS-less bought iPhone? To force Apple to sell iOS-less/unlocked iPhones? This lawsuit is like saying that Google should be forced to allow for other browser than Chrome to be used on Chromebook devices. The whole device is a tightly integrated top to bottom s…

> This lawsuit is like saying that Google should be forced to allow for other browser than Chrome to be used on Chromebook devices.

Well, yes - obviously, no? If a tech company wants to build a completely closed ecosystem they can fuck off - that includes Epic games. Epic is doing this for their pockets, but the freedom of the end user is only going to continue to be eroded as more and more software moves into the cloud. This isn't like GDPR, the marginal cost to Apple to add a sane way to load what you want on hardware you bought is almost nil.

It would be unreasonable to make Apple sell phones without an operating system, it would not, however, be unreasonable to force them to allow users to have the privilege of even running their own apps at their own risk.

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

#140

Post by stale2002 »

pwinnski wrote: post #134
stale2002 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the other, Apple isn't even the biggest company. Actually Apple would be the biggest company, in the market of people who have smartphones in the US. They just recently have a bit over 50% of that market. Also, Apple does not need to be a literal, singular company for its actions to be illegal. Instead, it only needs to have significant market power. It doesn't even need to have a majority of the market. > the a…

This is my point exactly. What the judge in each case has to determine is how best to define the market. Whether "smartphone owners" or "devices that play videogames" or "App Store users" or "iOS devices" or "computers" or "phones" or any number of other ways. Do you determine it in the US only, or world-wide? (US courts have jurisdiction only here, but can determine a market based on any parameters) Do you determine…

Although the nitty gritty details of the situation may be complicated, I do think that the high level situation is pretty simple.

IE I am not sure how anyone could look at Apple's control over its market, and its policies, and disagree with the idea that Apple has significant control, and that its policies are anti-competitive.

Regardless over the exact definition of a market that you use, it is quite clear that Apple has pretty significant market power over something and that its actions cause app prices to be significantly higher than they would be otherwise, if they allowed competing app stores.

Post reply on HN