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

Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#721

Post by kibwen »

theshrike79 wrote: post #701
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Monopolies aren’t illegal. Only the abuse of a monopoly position to advance your interest in other markets is illegal. So for example, if you had a dominant market position for a particular category of phone operating systems, and you wanted to advance your interest in the market for app distribution...

This exact same argument works for Nintendo, Sony PlayStation and the Xbox They all have closed application ecosystems and don’t allow third party stores.

This isn't a gotcha; consoles should be required to support homebrew games as well.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#722

Post by sidlls »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #43
kulahan wrote: post #23

For anyone curious why Google lost: >Epic v. Google [...] hinged on secret revenue sharing deals between Google, smartphone makers, and big game developers, ones that Google execs internally believed were designed to keep rival app stores down. Without finding the same thing in Apple, I doubt this will affect Apple's case much, but of course I should mention I'm not a lawyer; I'm perfectly happy to be schooled if som…

Apple doesn't need to strike secret deals to keep out alternative app stores because they've made alternate app stores completely impossible. If the result of this case is "you can have a monopoly as long as your device and ecosystem are 100% locked down", that's terrible!

How is Apple a monopoly? They have a huge competitor in the mobile phone market: Google/Android. I could see arguing that Apple and Google are a duopoly.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#723

Post by sidlls »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #662
wilg wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like you could make that apply to any product right? If you can define the market as literally just your own product? Like if Joe's Coffee has a dominant market position in selling Joe's Coffee it would be monopolistic to use that to advantage to sell donuts?

There is a difference between selling donuts in the coffee shop and preventing anyone who drinks your coffee from buying a competitor's donuts.

They aren't preventing anyone from buying a competitor's donuts. At one point I had both an Apple and a Google Android phone. Apple preventing other app stores on iOS is more like Starbucks preventing Peet's from coming into its stores to sell its coffee. That's not monopolistic behavior.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#724

Post by j_maffe »

overstay8930 wrote: post #713
andy_ppp wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really doesn't matter who is worse morally here, just both situations are bad for consumer choice. I find it amazing that Apple things it is okay to attempt to take 15% of Audible revenue if they allowed you to buy books in the app, for example.

I agree but not enough to get the government involved

Who else can regulate markets?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#725

Post by Mordisquitos »

DeathArrow wrote: post #653
rpgwaiter wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AuroraStore is very close, using a ton of reverse engineered stuff from the play store It should all totally be open though

You can install and run apps from Aurora store without having Google Services installed? Did Aurora store replace Google Services somehow? Many apps depend on those services.

Many of the Google Services functionalities can be provided, mimicked, or worked around with microG: https://microg.org/

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#726

Post by wildrhythms »

overstay8930 wrote: post #713
andy_ppp wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really doesn't matter who is worse morally here, just both situations are bad for consumer choice. I find it amazing that Apple things it is okay to attempt to take 15% of Audible revenue if they allowed you to buy books in the app, for example.

I agree but not enough to get the government involved

What's your solution?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#727

Post by tinus_hn »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #43
kulahan wrote: post #23

For anyone curious why Google lost: >Epic v. Google [...] hinged on secret revenue sharing deals between Google, smartphone makers, and big game developers, ones that Google execs internally believed were designed to keep rival app stores down. Without finding the same thing in Apple, I doubt this will affect Apple's case much, but of course I should mention I'm not a lawyer; I'm perfectly happy to be schooled if som…

Apple doesn't need to strike secret deals to keep out alternative app stores because they've made alternate app stores completely impossible. If the result of this case is "you can have a monopoly as long as your device and ecosystem are 100% locked down", that's terrible!

Alternatively if you can’t have a closed ecosystem, there’s no incentive in creating the next generation of consoles and console gaming is dead.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#728

Post by nolist_policy »

jncfhnb wrote: post #377
TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the result of this case is "you can have a monopoly as long as your device and ecosystem are 100% locked down", that's terrible! Monopolies aren’t illegal. Only the abuse of a monopoly position to advance your interest in other markets is illegal. E.g. It’s not illegal to be the only seller of gasoline in the country. It is illegal though to bundle laundry powder with gasoline sales to corner the laundry powder…

If we see fair competition reducing fees massively in android vs Apple, Apple’s abuse will be clear

This. It isn't productive to think about this like "Google lost, Epic won" or "Google lost, Apple won".

Rather think about this as Google lost, Android won. If this ruling goes trough, Android becomes an more open platform by default. Think about it: Steam, itch.io and GOG stores on Android.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#729

Post by [deleted] »

MBCook wrote: post #535
johndhi wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes - this. It's not uncommon thah the legislature has passed a law in reaction to a court decision to clarify a law.

Current example everyone is likely aware of: all the various states trying to pass pro/anti-abortion laws in the wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling.

[deleted]

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#730

Post by fredgrott »

johndhi wrote: post #321

Couple of thoughts for HN as a lawyer: 1. The fact that Google lost here doesn't bind or affect apple. Jury verdicts aren't binding on any party other than those in the lawsuit. Apple may or may not be found to violate the law in a separate case. 2. Interesting no one has mentioned Epic's Chinese ownership. I could see Google complaining to us govt that it's unfair for Chinese tech to win these court cases against US…

ahem you know that item 2 given that it is non probative is a non starter as a legal argument...are you asleep doing lawyering?
Post reply on HN