Epic appeals Apple verdict, ponders meaning of the word 'button'

[Lightwreather]

Summary

Epic isn't satisfied by its one win in the Apple trial.

(Image credit: NurPhoto (Getty images))

Quotes

Quote

Epic Games has appealed last week's verdict in its antitrust case against Apple, which was tried in California earlier this year.

Epic wasn't able to convince the US District Court that Apple was running an illegal monopoly by preventing iOS apps from offering alternatives to Apple's payment processing systems, and the ruling went in Apple's favor almost entirely. The one win Epic did get was pretty big, though: One of Apple's rules preventing apps from advertising their own payment methods was deemed anticompetitive under California's Unfair Competition Law. 

As a result, the Court has ordered Apple to remove its rule preventing developers from including "buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms" in their apps.

We never expected Epic to win overall here, and forcing Apple to change even one of its rules is no small feat, but Epic hasn't celebrated the accomplishment, treating it as a total loss. This fight will continue on with the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

In the meantime, the order that Epic did win, which affects all iOS app makers, has Epic CEO Tim Sweeney is wondering: What's a button?

If developers will be allowed to put "buttons" in their apps that "direct customers to purchasing mechanisms," does that mean they can include a button that goes to a non-Apple checkout system in the app? That's what Epic wants to be able to do, and it's the only way it'll put Fortnite back on iOS. But Apple could say, no, the order only means that you can include a button that opens a website that contains a purchasing mechanism.

 

It's a bit vague. Nobody knows for sure what the precise legal meaning of the word button is, here, but it's about to get a very thorough testing. Apple has 90 days from the verdict to comply with the injunction.

The button question isn't the first time the case has wanted for a legal definition. The day of the verdict reminded us all that there's still no real legal outline of what a videogame actually is in the United States. 

The Court did, however, determine that Sweeney's opinions about the metaverse are sincerely held, and during the trial we got it on record that Peely is "just a banana." Maybe we'll know what a button is when it's all over, too.

 

My thoughts

Okay, I got up this morning, but I wasn't expecting Buttons to have an existential crisis.... All jokes aside, I honestly was expecting apple to appeal, but Epic? Although, if you think about it, they weren't really happy with the ruling, but they could still very well lose the appeal. Well, whatever happens, we'll have to wait and see what happens.

Sources

PCGamer

[XWAUForceflow]

There was no reason for Apple to appeal, they won on all accounts against Epic and while the only part that they lost (having to allow other payments systems) is the biggest part for Apple, I think they gave up on it. I think they know that there is no undoing that and appealing the case on that count have a high chance of backfiring on them making things worse.

 

Epic on the other hand, of course they would appeal. They did not gain anything from the case. While third party payments will now be allowed they themselves are still banned from Apple and they have to pay the money that Apple thinks they owe them.

[StDragon]

33 minutes ago, XWAUForceflow said:

There was no reason for Apple to appeal, they won on all accounts against Epic and while the only part that they lost (having to allow other payments systems) is the biggest part for Apple, I think they gave up on it. I think they know that there is no undoing that and appealing the case on that count have a high chance of backfiring on them making things worse.

 

Epic on the other hand, of course they would appeal. They did not gain anything from the case. While third party payments will now be allowed they themselves are still banned from Apple and they have to pay the money that Apple thinks they owe them.

No. I'm expecting scorched Earth from Apple. Their attorneys will be worked to the bone with the sound of whip cracking in the background. 

[Sauron]

7 hours ago, J-from-Nucleon said:

Although, if you think about it, they weren't really happy with the ruling, but they could still very well lose the appeal.

For them, there's no point in winning if they don't get to do what they wanted in the first place. It's much faster to appeal than it would be to start a brand new trial to settle a definitions dispute.

[RejZoR]

40 minutes ago, XWAUForceflow said:

There was no reason for Apple to appeal, they won on all accounts against Epic and while the only part that they lost (having to allow other payments systems) is the biggest part for Apple, I think they gave up on it. I think they know that there is no undoing that and appealing the case on that count have a high chance of backfiring on them making things worse.

 

Epic on the other hand, of course they would appeal. They did not gain anything from the case. While third party payments will now be allowed they themselves are still banned from Apple and they have to pay the money that Apple thinks they owe them.

Epic did breach the contract at the time. I bet they were hoping the ruling woul dbe retroactive and allow them to force their way back to Apple's App Store and Apple won't allow it on purpose. I bet it'll be that way.

[HarryNyquist]

Siri remind me in a month about Apple banning Unreal Engine from iOS because Epic wants to complain about the meaning of the word "button".

[Helpful Tech Witch]

7 minutes ago, HarryNyquist said:

Siri remind me in a month about Apple banning Unreal Engine from iOS because Epic wants to complain about the meaning of the word "button".

Apple wouldn’t ban ue.

that would be terrible pr, banning Thousands and thousands of 3rd party apps because apple doesn’t like epic
 

and really, I can see apple going,” well, we were told buttons, so here’s this arbitrary bullshit button definition we use”

 

[Arika]

7 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

Apple wouldn’t ban ue.

They can't now, but they sure as he'll tried

 

https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/judge-makes-permanent-injunction-preventing-apple-from-banning-epics-unreal-engine/

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

They can't now, but they sure as he'll tried

 

https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/judge-makes-permanent-injunction-preventing-apple-from-banning-epics-unreal-engine/

Wait, permanant?
Like no matter what, UE stays?

[Lightwreather]

20 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

Wait, permanant?
Like no matter what, UE stays?

I assume this is in the court where the epic v apple trial was held. So no, it isn't permanent, it could, theoretically, be overturned by a higher court. Permanant in thisinstance means beyond the course of the trial (but idrk, so don't quote me on that)

[dizmo]

I'd laugh so hard if the push to a superior court somehow resulted in them taking back the old ruling and siding 100% with Apple. Take the small wins you got Epic, don't be greedy. 

 

I don't see a problem with them linking to an outside website for payments. 

[leadeater]

Seems like Epic and Apple are trying to push each others buttons.....

....

....

 

Spoiler

Not sorry, feel that disappointment flow muahahaha

 

I think everyone saw this battle coming after the ruling though, nothing is ever that simple, even more so when it could be.

[Tenelia]

13 hours ago, dizmo said:

I'd laugh so hard if the push to a superior court somehow resulted in them taking back the old ruling and siding 100% with Apple. Take the small wins you got Epic, don't be greedy. 

 

I don't see a problem with them linking to an outside website for payments. 

Might be possible... Consider that the courts weren't happy with both sides; they've noted Epic was plausibly disingenuous about their allegedly noble intentions. See this excerpt from the court document:

 

Spoiler

Messrs. Sweeney and Steve Allison, Vice President and General Manager of the Epic Games Store, testified that Epic Games always had an original intent to include non-gaming apps within the Epic Games Store citing to the inclusion of Unreal Engine on the store page, and conversations with several other non-gaming app companies including Twitch and Discord in 2018.103 The claim is suspect. First, the Epic Games Store only made significant moves during the pendency of this litigation and on the eve of this bench trial by including non-game apps including: the Spotify music app (December 2020), the Brave web browser, the KenShape creation tool for artists, and Itch.io, a third-party store (April 22, 2021).104 Indeed, while Epic Games urges in this lawsuit that Apple must allow third-party app stores in the App Store, the Epic Games Store did not itself distribute any third-party app stores until a few days before trial (approximately April 22, 2021).105 Second, neither Discord nor Twitch have submitted their own apps for inclusion on the Epic Games Store.106 Finally, with respect to Unreal Engine, although the Epic Games Store links to it, the Unreal Engine has its own website with its own domain name and appears separate and apart from the Epic Games Store.107

 

This conclusion is also supported by the design of the Epic Games Store’s website itself which markets “games” specifically. The navigation tabs on the homepage—“games on sale,” “free games,” “new and trending,” “new releases,” “top sellers,” “[t]op 20,” and “coming soon”—lead to compilations consisting entirely of games. The “top news items” tab offers only news about games. The search bar prompts the user to “search all games” (and not to “searchapps”). The “help” tab describes Epic Games Store’s consumers as “players.” Finally, the Epic Games Store’s “FAQ” describes the Epic Games Store as a “curated digital storefront for PC an Mac” that is “designed with both players and creators in mind” and is “focused on providing great games for gamers and a fair deal for game developers.”108

 

Like other platforms, the Epic Games Store uses a commission model and markets an 88/12 split of all revenues to developers from the sale of their games. The evidence is also undisputed that this 88/12 commission is a below-cost price and the store is expected to operate at a loss for many years at this rate. 109

 

From Epic Games Store’s launch to December 2019, Epic Games collected its commission through its own payment mechanism, which it required developers to use for all game purchases and in-game purchases.110 Epic Games no longer requires any developer to use its payment processing system, called Epic direct payment, for in-app purchases.111 Developers who do not use Epic direct payment do not pay Epic Games anything for in-app purchases.112

 

Because of this open policy, several app developers have elected to use their own payment and purchase functionality for in-app purchases, such as Ubisoft and Wizards of the Coast.113

 

Epic Games acknowledges that its commission is not merely a “payment processing” fee. The 12 percent fee is principally for access to Epic Games’ customers, but also is intended to cover all of Epic Games’ variable operating costs associated with selling incremental games to customers. It covers various services to game developers, including “hosting, player support, marketing of their games, and handling of refunds,” “a supporter/creator marketing program,” and “social media for game launches, video promotions[,] . . . featuring at physical events, such as E3[,] [a]nd sponsorships of the video games.” The commission is thus “tied into these broader ecosystem benefits that [Epic Games] provide to [its] developers,” and is intended to cover the full “cost of operating the service,” “the actual distribution cost, the internet bandwidth cost, [and] the . . . cost of maintaining it.”114

 

Today, Epic Games Store has over 180 million registered accounts and more than 50 million monthly active users.115 It supports more than 100 third-party app developers and publishes over 400 of their apps.116 Epic Games Store operates a single storefront across multiple geographies.117

 

Epic Games is a would-be and self-avowed competitor of Apple in the distribution of apps.118 Absent the restrictions imposed by Apple, Epic Games would operate a mobile version of the Epic Games Store on iOS that would compete with Apple’s App Store.119

 

[Belgarathian]

Up next: Apple introduces a new App store fee per download for apps that have external payment options.

[DrMacintosh]

5 minutes ago, Grand Admiral Thrawn said:

How the tables have turned for Apple and their lawsuit harassment strategy.

How exactly does this relate to the topic? Epic is/was the aggressor in this case. 

[hishnash]

On 9/13/2021 at 4:38 PM, J-from-Nucleon said:

Okay, I got up this morning, but I wasn't expecting Buttons to have an existential crisis.... All jokes aside, I honestly was expecting apple to appeal, but Epic? Although, if you think about it, they weren't really happy with the ruling, but they could still very well lose the appeal. Well, whatever happens, we'll have to wait and see what happens.

 

Apple was not going to appeal the basically won the case, yer they need to permit apps to link out to the web but they can do whatever they like during that, if they want they can put up a big scary warning to discourage users etc.  The change for apple will have minimal effect, given that games will not use it since it will completely disrupt the addition impulse buy (discussing) mechanic that they depend upon to exploit people into paying money, if your linked out to a webpage and on the way are forced to confirm that this page `might steal your identity` and apple (as the court ruling suggests) can still require devs to offer IAP the real money will continue to flow through IAP.

Epic lost, big time.

1) the judge said that they will not get side loading or alternative apps stores (this was epics main goal all along, the judge even said so)
2) apple was correct to ban them and can even go ahead and ban their other app developer account that creates Unreal... making it much harder for them to develop and sell Unreal to mobile develop market (a large % of epics revenue)
3) Since Epic broke contract apple is not required to every let them back in, even if they now agree to comply with the rules, there is nothing compelling apple to have a contract with Epic and they can block them for ever (and apple will block them for ever, epic chose to make this every personal and in so doing are going to pay the price that will likely cost them billions and ruin their current almost manpoply as a licensed game engine). 

 

 

1 hour ago, Belgarathian said:

Up next: Apple introduces a new App store fee per download for apps that have external payment options.

No more likely apple intrude revenue share agreements (like what Epic, Sony and MS use) for apps with eternal payments.

These agreements let you get the money however you like but you still need to pay 30% of the money you get to Sony/MS (or 10% ish to Epic) if you use their SDKs. .. Developing for iOS requires you to use apples SDK just as it does to develop for Playstation and xbox.  Doing this would not be in breach of the law that the judge found apple to be in breach of would be 100% legal move.

Then like epic they could say, "if you use our app store policy we will not charge you as we take a cut that way" (this is what epic do for Unreal games that use the Epic games store payment system. 

 

 

15 hours ago, dizmo said:

I don't see a problem with them linking to an outside website for payments. 

This was never about payments, epic wanted to be able to bring the Epic Games store to iOS. This was always a move (likely funded by Tencent) to enable third party app stores so that they could get 10-15% of all game revenue on iOS (not just fortnight) but also get lots of data about what types of games people are playing ... (maybe so they could figure out what other games to clone into fortnight). 

[hishnash]

18 hours ago, HarryNyquist said:

Siri remind me in a month about Apple banning Unreal Engine from iOS because Epic wants to complain about the meaning of the word "button".

Apple will not ban Unreal Engine, but they are going to make it a lot harder for epic to develop it.  They can't ban it since when used by a third party dev it is signed by that developer as part of their bundle. Apple could put something into that app store terms that forbids you from having revenue share based license IP within your apps (epic take a % share of your revenue when you make a game using their engine) but this would have massive issues with other license SDKs this model is extremely common in the industry most SDK licenses are based on either number of users or % revenue. 

[Video Beagle]

5 hours ago, hishnash said:

Apple will not ban Unreal Engine, but they are going to make it a lot harder for epic to develop it.

I wonder If we're gonna see some big name Unreal users start taking a hard look at Epic, as they're putting their livelyhoods on the line for Epic's benefit, not theirs.

 

UNITY®: We don't pick fights with Apple and Google.

[LAwLz]

23 minutes ago, Video Beagle said:

I wonder If we're gonna see some big name Unreal users start taking a hard look at Epic, as they're putting their livelyhoods on the line for Epic's benefit, not theirs.

 

UNITY®: We don't pick fights with Apple and Google.

Probably, and if that's what happens then Apple are basically threatening and blackmailing developers. Get in line or we will destroy you.

[hishnash]

22 hours ago, Video Beagle said:

I wonder If we're gonna see some big name Unreal users start taking a hard look at Epic, as they're putting their livelyhoods on the line for Epic's benefit, not theirs.

 

UNITY®: We don't pick fights with Apple and Google.

For sure, Unreal is going to find it quite a bit harder to sell to mobile devs.

 

 

21 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Probably, and if that's what happens then Apple are basically threatening and blackmailing developers. Get in line or we will destroy you.

Not just apple, epic are also suing google and if sony were not deeply invested with them they would also be suing Sony. The real reason there not suing Sony is unlike apple or google Sony could with a snap of their fingers full remove all unreal engine support from playstation and due to the much more strict terms that playstation devs sign epic would not be able to do a thing, loosing the mobile gaming market is one thing but loosing the playstation as a market would effectively ruin Unreal engine.
 

[Video Beagle]

23 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Probably, and if that's what happens then Apple are basically threatening and blackmailing developers. Get in line or we will destroy you.

I disagree. This is on epic. THEY violated the agreements they signed. THEY are the ones not accepting the judges decision that they violated the agreements they signed.

 

It's not even a question of fact.  Epic DID knowingly violate the agreements with both Apple and Google in order to set the stage for their lawsuit to try to get all the money for themselves, and used the developers who had signed on to Unreal as pawns.

 

Some small developer using the unreal engine for their game didn't violate apple's rules, but because of epic, not apple, they might be screwed.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Video Beagle said:

Some small developer using the unreal engine for their game didn't violate apple's rules, but because of epic, not apple, they might be screwed.

Except you know, Apple could just remove Epic's app that violated their TOS (Fortnite). It is 100% on Apple if they decide to remove all Unreal Engine products or not. Stop pretending like Apple doesn't have any choice or responsibility. 

[Video Beagle]

21 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Except you know, Apple could just remove Epic's app that violated their TOS (Fortnite). It is 100% on Apple if they decide to remove all Unreal Engine products or not. Stop pretending like Apple doesn't have any choice or responsibility. 

Apple hasn't removed any Unreal using apps. They have terminated Epic's developer account, which seems to me would hamper Epic's ability to..you know..develop Unreal Engine, which would cause difficulties for the people who signed on with Epic.  And agin, this is Epic's own doing. They knowingly violated agreements they signed, knowing the potential outcome.

Epic has acted in bad faith to it's own clients. It's up to them to make amends. Stop pretending like Epic doesn't have any choice or responibility.