Epic Games take on Apple

[Mikebentley]

Epic Games have filed a legal action against Apple Inc following the removal of their Fortnite app from the App Store. Apple removed it after Epic announced a 20% reduction in cost for players buying V Bucks (Fortnite currency) not via in app purchase denying Apple their 30% share.

Fortnite released an animated short movie based on George Orwell’s 1984 showing an apple as the all controlling ruler of a dystopian world. This closely mimicked the same style advert Apple used in 1984 when trying to take on IBM at the time.

Epic Games is not fighting Apple for any monetary gains only it implies to stop Apples restrictive practices on game developers by its alledged monopoly.

It’s hopefully going to be one heck of a fight. Some lawyers are going to get rich.

[robbieduncan]

They have also filed against Google who also removed Fortnite from the Google Play Store (for the same reason)

[TheJimi]

robbieduncan said:

They have also filed against Google who also removed Fortnite from the Google Play Store (for the same reason)

but that's not as juicy as the "bad apple" narrative

[Jinx]

Mikebentley said:

Epic Games is not fighting Apple for any monetary gains only it implies to stop Apples restrictive practices on game developers by its alledged monopoly.

Not quite true - they are not after a monetary award if they win but there is a lot of money at stake for Epic given the in game purchases of Fortnite (a boost of 30% if they can use their own store is not just chump change).

[Mikebentley]

Jinx said:

Mikebentley said:

Epic Games is not fighting Apple for any monetary gains only it implies to stop Apples restrictive practices on game developers by its alledged monopoly.

Not quite true - they are not after a monetary award if they win but there is a lot of money at stake for Epic given the in game purchases of Fortnite (a boost of 30% if they can use their own store is not just chump change).

I get your point and there will always be alternative commercial motivations however it takes a corp as big as Epic to challenge a company as big as Apple. I as a Luddite end user appreciate Apple levels of control as I have no need for virus protection generally.

It does seem though this is part of the conversation about these huge corporations and issues around monopoly of the marketplace.

[mmm-five]

If Epic win, does that mean Epic will have to stop charging their 12% fee to sell via their store too?

[mmm-five]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Ah, so it's not the extortionate 30% fee they're on about, just the restrictive in-app payment options - of course with no other 'legal' option of installing the apps any other way on an iOS device.

A bit different than on MacOS then, where I can get a trial from the App Store and then buy/download the full version (most of the time) directly from the creator.

[hyphen]

I'm in.

Should be an Epic battle

[hyphen]

I think beyond that, as only 2 mobile platforms exist. We have a Duopoloy.

If there were 50 different platforms then a retailer could choose, but instead they have no choice but to use these platforms.

And with such a captive market, 30% seems very hard to justify as a percentage. Should be much smaller and proportional to any costs incurrred, if not non existent.

[Xaero]

If Epic win, this will affect Apple share price as an enormous amount of their income comes from this.

It's certainly interesting, no-one is forced to use an iPhone or Android, and even more so for playing multi-platform games, so those 2 companies should reap the rewards of their efforts, but maybe there does need to be some regulatory oversight on the percentage they take. If they decide they want 40 or 50%, then apart from abandoning the platform, what can app companies do?

They do deserve some compensation for being the store front. I don't want to order my crisps from walkers, chocolate from cadburys, cheese from Somerset all separate, that's why I go to a supermarket.

Steam used to be the go-to place for buying PC games, but almost all big game houses now have their own launchers. While they benefit more financially, the end user had to download lots of extra software to manage their games, which is generally a negative.

[stevoknevo]

TheJimi said:

but that's not as juicy as the "bad apple" narrative

It's not as 'juicy' purely because Google allows sideloading of apps from outside of the Play Store, something Apple doesn't - the target demographic who play Fortnite etc on Android will have no technical issues in getting the game on their devices via alternative sources.

[mmm-five]

Sounds like what Network Rail do to the food retailers in stations...charge them high commercial rents, and then ask for a % of profits too - and is why the prices at stations are usually about 20% higher than the high street.

[hyphen]

Xaero said:

It's certainly interesting, no-one is forced to use an iPhone or Android, and even more so for playing multi-platform games,

The customer demands to play on his phone, if the game maker doesn't provide, someone else will provide a cloned equievelent.

So its not really an option to exclude phones, as along woth revenue, you are then leaving yourself open to competition.

[Mikebentley]

I saw somewhere Apple described as “Mafia” which whilst inflammatory is an interesting descriptive. I can’t believe I’m typing this in agreement with him/ her but hyphen makes an equally interesting point that it is really a duopoly between Google and Apple for consumer choice and if there were 50 options the issue would not exist due to a competitive marketplace.

Personally I have a dozen Apple products in the house ( I know sucker) but will in future try to think hard about usage and other options. Another thing is Sony recently purchased a 1.4% stake in Epic for $250 million. Tim Sweeney is personally worth approx $6 billion and Fortnite in app revenues were I believe over $2 billion dollars last year on a game system it is actually possible to play for free and earn free spends.

[RDMcG]

This is the most serious threat to Apple’s model in the current hostile environment. Well financed and organized it will play on the political as well as legal stages. As I recall Epic is largely owned by TenCent so even more interesting.

[Durzel]

I feel intuitively like I'm cheering on Apple here, against my better judgement.

- Epic has enriched themselves from the iOS App Store. it's only a problem now because they want even more money.

- "V Bucks" to buy Fortnite s**t. F**k you Epic.

That being said, it's not like Apple needs the money.

Is mutually assured destruction a viable option?

anonymous said:

[redacted]

One is a tangible item for one, the other can be sold a million times over at no additional cost to Epic. Also, why shouldn't it be? Their ecosystem, their rules. Epic can choose not to use it at all if they want, but they don't want to not want - they want to have their cake and eat it. They want access to Apple's install base, so they can hawk their stty microtransactions, but they don't want to pay for that access (or at least not the contracted rate).

Edited by Durzel on Friday 14th August 15:34

[Durzel]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I doff my cap to you good sir

[TheJimi]

Durzel said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I doff my cap to you good sir

Warm fuzzy feelings all round

[phil4]

Although we've identified that there's 30% up front, and then 30% on in-app purchases, and it's this last bit that Epic have a problem with.... let's not forget that many software developers circumvent the 30% up front, by offering their app for free, and then charging in-app for either digital trinkets, or to unlock features. The so called Fremium model. It's -very- popular.

If Epic win this, not only will Apple make zilch per download from them, they'll also make zilch per in-app purchase, where the Epic obviously intends making their money.

Should apple make 30%? Maybe not. But I don't think it's as black and white as extortion, Epic are literally gunning to pay Apple/Google nothing at all.

Edited by phil4 on Friday 14th August 16:04

[mikeiow]

phil4 said:

Although we've identified that there's 30% up front, and then 30% on in-app purchases, and it's this last bit that Epic have a problem with.... let's not forget that many software developers circumvent the 30% up front, by offering their app for free, and then charging in-app for either digital trinkets, or to unlock features. The so called Fremium model. It's -very- popular.

If Epic win this, not only will Apple make zilch per download from them, they'll also make zilch per in-app purchase, where the Epic obviously intends making their money.

Should apple make 30%? Maybe not. But I don't think it's as black and white as extortion, Epic are literally gunning to pay Apple/Google nothing at all.

I admit to loving Apple products more than I want to.....but am I the only one who thinks that their 30% cut literally *is* extortion?

They sit on a massive pile of money whilst just absorbing these profits, and whilst I don't particularly consider myself a socialist, I feel that their business practises (& googles) *are* monopolistic (duopolistic!?) and wrong.