Jump to content

~*Official War of the Tims (Sweeney/Cook) Thread*~ - update: Epic offered Sony $200 million to put 4 to 6 first-party titles on EGS, Apple seeking "adverse credibility finding" against testimony of MS executive


Recommended Posts

wow, Epic Games has added its own payments scheme to Fortnite on iOS. It bypasses Apple's IAP system and it's cheaper. Not sure how Epic is able to do this, but it's good news for Fortnite fans! https://t.co/wChrUiQeJs pic.twitter.com/FaQEzOICWM

— Tom Warren (@tomwarren) August 13, 2020

Epic's Fornite has been removed from the App Store after they implemented direct payments, circumventing Apple's 30% cut.

— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) August 13, 2020

Epic Games has filed legal papers in response to Apple, read more here: https://t.co/c4sgvxQUvb

— Fortnite (@FortniteGame) August 13, 2020
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Today, Epic Games took the unfortunate step of violating the App Store guidelines that are applied equally to every developer and designed to keep the store safe for our users. As a result their Fortnite app has been removed from the store. Epic enabled a feature in its app which was not reviewed or approved by Apple, and they did so with the express intent of violating the App Store guidelines regarding in-app payments that apply to every developer who sells digital goods or services.

Epic has had apps on the App Store for a decade, and have benefited from the App Store ecosystem - including it’s tools, testing, and distribution that Apple provides to all developers. Epic agreed to the App Store terms and guidelines freely and we’re glad they’ve built such a successful business on the App Store. The fact that their business interests now lead them to push for a special arrangement does not change the fact that these guidelines create a level playing field for all developers and make the store safe for all users. We will make every effort to work with Epic to resolve these violations so they can return Fortnite to the App Store.

Apple Statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some of the constraints of the app store are a feature. I could even see requiring alternative payment mechanism approval if it's not through them. But requiring buying through the app store with a 30% cut is bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Consumers at this point are well aware of the walled garden around apple products. If consumers are inclined to switch because of fortnight  or game streaming they will. Epic wants the apple consumer base but doesnt want to pay for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for Apple and Google charging folks for using their payment methods. I'm completely against Apple and Google forcing companies to use their payment methods. There is no reason they couldn't allow so creators to go through other companies like Square, PayPal, Amazon, or whatever other major payment processors for in a purchases.

 

Also, it looks like Epic is claiming Google forced LG and OnePlus from installing the EGS on their phones alongside the Google Play Store.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368395/fortnite-epic-games-oneplus-deal-google-play-store-lawsuit-lg

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 8/14/2020 at 7:12 AM, Ghost_MH said:

They aren't, but who else beside another asshole of a company with tons of cash on hand could hold Apple's and Google's feet to the fire here?

I agree. The idea that because this boils down to money it's somehow invalidates everything, as if every fight between companies didn't somehow boil down to being about money.

 

Just look at the whole Hey saga. They were fighting about a very similar thing, and they were desperately trying to follow the rules, and that still wasn't enough for Apple. Hey might have won their fight, but it didn't change Apple's policies one bit. Fortnight is actually big enough they might be able to accomplish something, though I doubt it.

 

On 8/13/2020 at 9:31 PM, Ghost_MH said:

I'm all for Apple and Google charging folks for using their payment methods. I'm completely against Apple and Google forcing companies to use their payment methods. There is no reason they couldn't allow so creators to go through other companies like Square, PayPal, Amazon, or whatever other major payment processors for in a purchases.

 

Also, it looks like Epic is claiming Google forced LG and OnePlus from installing the EGS on their phones alongside the Google Play Store.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368395/fortnite-epic-games-oneplus-deal-google-play-store-lawsuit-lg

If those allegations are true, that might be the single most enforceable breach of anti-trust we've seen yet. It's one thing to tell people "here are the rules to our playground," it's quite another to prevent them from building or playing in any other playground.

 

Without that part, I don't think Epic has much of a case against Google, since Google does allow other stores and even apps without stores.

 

 

Still, their ruling against game streaming apps is probably more consequential than the in-app purchase issue.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pulling Epic's dev certificate would be pretty extreme. 

 

Newer versions of MacOS require all apps, even if they're not distributed through the app store, to be notarized before they can run. This would make it difficult or impossible to install Epic software on a Mac. I have to imagine that even if Epic themselves primarily use Windows, a lot of people develop UE projects on Macs. 

 

I also think that suddenly they're going from anti-trust grey area to an easily identifiable abuse of market power. Much like Google working with phone makers to prevent Fortnite from being bundled outside the play store, this is Apple saying that if you don't place nice in one sandbox, we're going to wreak havoc on your ability to function in these other domains we also control.

 

You're also introducing a whole new aspect of consumer harm, which seems like it could easily be identified should courts decide to update the anti-trust standard. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JPDunks4 said:

 

Watching this from afar... it is kind of funny.  Epic thought they were pretty cute forcing a lawsuit... and here is our cute little video poking fun at apple's 1984 ad.  Apple then comes over the top and says - how about we just put you out of business.  

 

This is kind of like Alien vs Predator.  Whoever wins - we lose.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think Apple going HAM here has anything to do with Epic, the two sides will reach an agreement, it has to do with sending a message to any other developer/publisher that Apple won’t mess around with similar actions. Not too many companies have the ability to go toe to toe with Apple in a protracted legal battle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TwinIon said:

Newer versions of MacOS require all apps, even if they're not distributed through the app store, to be notarized before they can run. This would make it difficult or impossible to install Epic software on a Mac. I have to imagine that even if Epic themselves primarily use Windows, a lot of people develop UE projects on Macs. 

 

Really? I don't use my mac that often anymore, but previously signing was just to get on the Mac App Store or past default security settings, not to just run period. There are security settings that default to them checking for signing even when downloaded from the web, but you could always turn those off.

 

It would be next to impossible to do actual development if all programs required signing especially with the wide ranging languages you can use to make binaries so that would be pretty egregious to require.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, number305 said:

Watching this from afar... it is kind of funny.  Epic thought they were pretty cute forcing a lawsuit... and here is our cute little video poking fun at apple's 1984 ad.  Apple then comes over the top and says - how about we just put you out of business.  

 

This is kind of like Alien vs Predator.  Whoever wins - we lose.

 

Nah. Even though Epic is doing this for entirely selfish reasons, if they win then everyone other than Apple wins and that's fine by me. Same goes for the Google side of things. Apple Pay and Google Pay should certainly be options on the app side of things, but they shouldn't be the end all. I just don't see why companies like Square or PayPal or even Amazon shouldn't get to offer their services to handle in app payments. Any competition there would be good.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, legend said:

 

Really? I don't use my mac that often anymore, but previously signing was just to get on the Mac App Store or past default security settings, not to just run period. There are security settings that default to them checking for signing even when downloaded from the web, but you could always turn those off.

 

It would be next to impossible to do actual development if all programs required signing especially with the wide ranging languages you can use to make binaries so that would be pretty egregious to require.

The Verge's story on the subject specifies that "Apple requires that all apps are notarized before they can be run on newer versions of macOS, even if they’re distributed outside the App Store."

 

I'm not really sure how it works exactly or which MacOS version started doing that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

The Verge's story on the subject specifies that "Apple requires that all apps are notarized before they can be run on newer versions of macOS, even if they’re distributed outside the App Store."

 

I'm not really sure how it works exactly or which MacOS version started doing that.

 

Hmm. I'm going to double check that, because I don't think that's true. That wasn't how it worked just a couple years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, legend said:

 

Hmm. I'm going to double check that, because I don't think that's true. That wasn't how it worked just a couple years ago.

 

@TwinIon Okay, so it turns out it's not true, but Apple *has* made it even harder than before.

 

Before in your settings you could just choose to allow apps from anywhere. Not they've removed that option by default.

 

You now have the following fall backs:

1. After trying to open an unidentified app, open your system settings, go to privacy and it will show that it blocked a recent app from opening and you can select to allow that.

2. You can enter a command line command to make them allow from anywhere option re-appear and then can set it globally.

 

Also, this only really applies for standard mac os apps (other binaries or scripts are fine).

 

 

But I think that's only the article being "technically" wrong. These measures Apple's taken to block that is frankly absurd and irritating as hell. They really are committed to making macOS worse with every update it seems. Its peak was 10.6 Snow Leopard, IMO and it's just been down hill since then.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Commissar SFLUFAN changed the title to ~*Official War of the Tims (Sweeney/Cook) Thread*~ - update: Epic offered Sony $200 million to put 4 to 6 first-party titles on EGS, Apple seeking "adverse credibility finding" against testimony of MS executive

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...