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

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#371

Post by Andoryuuta »

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…

I'm not a lawyer, but the idea of #2 seems crazy to me.

Have there been any past case(s) where the country/nationality of minority owners of a company has been grounds for changing a ruling?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#372

Post by musictubes »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #186
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government does not (and legally cannot) give a darn on "dominance in market profits." If it isn't hurting consumers or illegally propping up market share, that's just called good business. As it should be, otherwise you end up with very bad incentives. For example, what's stopping Samsung then from using the world's most inefficient and old manufacturing techniques, and then complaining Apple's more efficient (b…

Ok but apple is hurting consumers with their 30% fee. I would not have bought an iPhone if I knew about that. Now Im locked in.

Locked in? You can't buy another phone? Would you have been able to buy the apps you use without Google taking 30% as well?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#373

Post by dmoy »

frognumber wrote: post #314
hackernewds wrote: post #267

I fail to understand how HN and the court system do not think the same against Apple

"The same against Apple" is very broad so I'm not sure what you're referring to, but Apple is presently less evil than Google. * Google started out pure good and turned pure evil. * Amazon started out mostly decent and turned mostly sleazy. * Apple started out sort of in the middle and stated there. "Middle" for Apple includes extremes in both directions. They do some pretty bad things with DRM, locking down devices,…

> If it's a specific litigation (Epic v. Apple

It's probably this that GP is confused over

It's addressed, if not in this article, then others - the Apple trial wasn't a jury trial. Google lost the motion to not have a jury trial

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#375

Post by MBCook »

giblfiz wrote: post #342
nojvek wrote: post #231

I wonder if Lina Khan will be able to finally get her anti-trust case through against Google. It’s interesting how the judges in Apple vs Epic stayed with Big Tech, same with Microsoft on the Blizzard acquisition. Almost if the Judges are scared of Big Tech but the Jury composed of lay people see the monopoly for what it is.

>It’s interesting how the judges in Apple vs Epic stayed with Big Tech My thought is that the judges are likely staying with the "letter of the law" which is what Big Tech (Big anything really) hires all of their lawyers to make sure that they technically stay within, while flagrantly violating the spirit of the law in a way that helps the business model. The Jury is more prone to look at the spirit of the law.

I agree. Why would a judge be afraid of Apple or Google? They don’t give a shit. Neither company is going to hire hitmen.

The judges are following previous rulings and trying to apply them to what are likely novel situations that the law was never intended to cover because it no one foresaw it.

The courts are not how you fix this. The legislature is. Unfortunately that’s too broken to do anything.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#376

Post by MBCook »

summerlight wrote: post #365
lolinder wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looks like Epic is getting almost everything they wanted from both Google and Apple, given that EU It remains to be seen whether Apple will comply with EU rules outside of the EU. If not, Epic isn't getting their way, because EU revenue alone isn't going to be enough.

Whenever DMA kicks in, I'm reasonably sure that there will be a number of state legislatures to follow this case, which will practically enforce Apple to open up the App store in the US.

Why do you say that?

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#377

Post by jncfhnb »

TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #250
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

> 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

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#378

Post by MBCook »

Andoryuuta wrote: post #371
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…

I'm not a lawyer, but the idea of #2 seems crazy to me. Have there been any past case(s) where the country/nationality of minority owners of a company has been grounds for changing a ruling?

I’m also not a lawyer, I don’t think they can change a ruling.

But they could certainly get a law passed that changes the rules and supersedes the ruling.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#379

Post by zemo »

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…

while they do have pretty deep ties to tencent and are 40% owned by them, they’re not really chinese-owned since Epic is majority-owned by Tim Sweeney, a billionaire programmer on the Forbes 500 who mostly escapes criticism from programmers and game devs by branding himself as a savior for indie devs, which people accept uncritically because he likes to go on twitter and affirm their priors. He’s a highly effective nerd populist.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#380

Post by [deleted] »

tomComb wrote: post #329
yieldcrv wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there is no sanction in the US for monopolies if the market chooses that, you just cant do anticompetitive things in the process or while you have one so simply being in the exact same position is not enough, the details of exactly how you navigate it are more important with that in mind, Apple is still vulnerable based on their behavior, but its not a slam dunk by mere nature of being in the same position for exampl…

But they are not in the exact same position - Apple has a much tighter grip on their App Store than Google, and they don’t even need to: they make money selling the devices.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN