Tuesday, August 25th 2020
Epic Games Gets Partial Relief in Legal Battle with Apple
Epic Games and Apple are engaged in an ugly legal battle over Epic's decision to add an in-app payment system for "Fortnite," in violation of Apple's terms. All in-game micro-transactions are expected to be routed through the App Store. Apple essentially de-platformed Epic Games, and "Fortnite," which would have far-reaching implications including restrictions on third-party games using the Unreal Engine. On Monday, Epic Games got a partial and temporary relief against Apple's action, in the form of a temporary restraining order which prevents Apple from terminating the developer accounts of Epic Games, and restricting the use of Unreal Engine by game developers on Apple platforms.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hearing the matter, however ruled that Apple isn't required to restore "Fortnite," which it banned after Epic Games added its in-game payments system that stepped on Apple's toes. Epic Games in its prayer to the Court argued that Apple's actions brought "irreparable harm" to the company. The Court disagreed. "The Court finds that with respect to Epic Games' motion as to its games, including Fortnite, Epic Games has not yet demonstrated irreparable harm. The current predicament appears of its own making." She argued that Epic Games "strategically chose to breach its agreements with Apple."
Sources:
The Verge, Tech Ghost (image credit)
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hearing the matter, however ruled that Apple isn't required to restore "Fortnite," which it banned after Epic Games added its in-game payments system that stepped on Apple's toes. Epic Games in its prayer to the Court argued that Apple's actions brought "irreparable harm" to the company. The Court disagreed. "The Court finds that with respect to Epic Games' motion as to its games, including Fortnite, Epic Games has not yet demonstrated irreparable harm. The current predicament appears of its own making." She argued that Epic Games "strategically chose to breach its agreements with Apple."
47 Comments on Epic Games Gets Partial Relief in Legal Battle with Apple
Tencent's 40% may not give them total control but they have influence and Sweeney's bet the farm in a SaaS future. Epic has lost the teams and in some cases the rights to some of its biggest IPs and really hasn't achieved much other than Fortnite.
Since 2012's Tencent buyout, The Bulletstorm, UT, and Infinity blade franchises have been cancelled, Paragon never saw the light of day and Fortnite is now banned from its two most popular platforms.
Part of me thinks that EPIC is trying to pull a 'Gabe Newell' with his focus on EGS and licenseable engine tech rather than games. Except rather than being the first to market and self-funded like Valve was, he's late to the market and relying on Chinese investment and third-party platforms (Apple, Google) to do the dirty work. It's a bold move, but Sweeney's possibly bitten off more than he can (or should realistically) chew here. IMO the guy has a god complex and it's about time he was stung for his arrogance.
I don't hold any love for any particular corporation, but I for one am siding with Epic on this one. Not for Epic itself but for all the smaller guys they're also fighting for. It's high time digital stores stop taking a 30% cut. It's undeserved and unjustified.
It's ridiculous that Apple has taken probably hundreds of millions of dollars from Fornite IAPs just because they own the platform.
If Epic fails I hope the EU forces Apple to allow third party payment systems for IAPs on iOS.
This should have been regulated since the beggining, not as a consequence of a battle between corporations.
If Apple and Google's walled gardens are investigated by a governing body, be it US-based or somehing like the European Commission, then this will be a good thing for the "little guys" you're talking about. I agree that the 30% cut is too steep but 70% of something is better than 100% of nothing and the something is entirely created by and the property of Apple/Google.
Let's fast forward a bit and predict that in 2021 Apple and Google are forced to change their terms or open up the walled garden - someone has to pay for the cloud hosting, the version control, the DRM, the admin of the distribution system. Even if the cut goes down, developers will likely be forced to pay in other ways. The issue is that within the walled gardens, everything is the property of (and the terms and conditions are set by) that walled-garden owner. It's not anti-competitive because Android is open and Windows is open. Other companies are free to make their own app store and distribute apps across that store on Android, Windows, Linux. The only company that is likely to suffer from this is Apple who do not have an open platform and (without jailbreaking) do not allow third-party app stores to run on their devices; That is where the terms 'captive-audience' and 'monopoly' apply, and it's where the regulators are most likely to intervene first.
The major problem is that both the EU and US commissions that investigate these things are painfully slow.
Let's face it, Apple do something terrible and global-headline-worthy several times a year but it makes no difference.