Friday, August 14th 2020

Fortnite Gets Kicked Out From Google and Apple App Stores, Epic Games Files a Lawsuit

by
AleksandarK
 Discuss (130 Comments)
Today, Epic Games has decided to file a lawsuit against both Apple and Google after both companies removed Fortnite form their platform app stores (Google Play and Apple App Store). Firstly, Apple has decided to remove the Fortnite app to form its App Store because the game violated the company's policy that all in-game payments must go through the Apple App Store system, instead of them being processed directly. That means that Apple can also apply its 30% cut on all the payments made in-game. After Apple has revoked the Fortnite app, Epic Games has decided to file a lawsuit that aims to fight the company's monopoly and make the iOS platform more developer-friendly. Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said that Epic will not seek or accept any special deal that Apple may offer, but rather wants to fight for all developers.

Just hours after Apple decided to pull the Fortnite game from its App Store, Google has also removed the game from its Google Play Store. Google's Play Store policy about in-app payments says that all games must use Google Play in-app billing if they want to process payments, so Fortnite was pulled from it as well. In light of that move, Epic Games has also filed a lawsuit against Google on the same terms. The company wants to fight both Apple and Google in court and make them be more developer-friendly, especially Apple. We have to wait and see how the case progresses. Being that Apple is almost a $2 trillion company, it can surely afford lots of good lawyers, just as Google will. We want to express our support for Epic Games for going in the right direction, as we do need more open ecosystems.
Sources: The Verge (Google lawsuit), The Verge (Apple lawsuit)

Related News

Add your own comment

130 Comments on Fortnite Gets Kicked Out From Google and Apple App Stores, Epic Games Files a Lawsuit

#26
Vayra86
EarthDogPlease don't be upset by my short reply...

I downloaded a free game, many of them, that emplor this model. I didn't buy any skins or any back bling or dances or......... whatever else. Fortnite, Apex, COD, etc. Call me Mr. Default. :)

That said, in my head (lol), I would spend up to $60 on in-game items because that is how much the game costs.

What I don't like is the P2W model which Fortnite (sticking with the thread title) is not.
Ah I see we're reasoning straight past each other then. I'm not talking about the model inside a game, because really isn't that entirely up to the discretion of the publisher/developer? My comment was about the layer on top of that, distribution/middle men who take a far too large piece of the pie and gain way too much power. The fact they can enforce this to begin with is fifteen bridges too far.
Posted on Reply
#27
EarthDog
Vayra86The fact they can enforce this to begin with is sixteen bridges too far.
FTFY. :p

Agreed. Apparently it's time for my morning caffeine.
Posted on Reply
#29
Nater
I've done this vs Nintendo. IRCC, buying V-bucks on the Epic Games Store on PC didn't charge sales tax. If we purchased thru Fortnite on the Switch, it did. Saving $2-$3 is a BIG deal to a 9 year old w/ a Visa Gift Card from Grandma.
Posted on Reply
#30
R0H1T
Vayra86Ah I see we're reasoning straight past each other then. I'm not talking about the model inside a game, because really isn't that entirely up to the discretion of the publisher/developer? My comment was about the layer on top of that, distribution/middle men who take a far too large piece of the pie and gain way too much power. The fact they can enforce this to begin with is fifteen bridges too far.
You do realize you can't straight up open a bank, a hospital, a bridge, heck your own form of govt ~ how is this any different? Yes it's greed, so is pretty much every other restriction forcing you into a "walled garden" or in fact modern day "democracy" :ohwell:

Basically this is EPIC being greedy themselves & for themselves, they're acting no differently than the "app stores" they're accusing of <whatever> in their lawsuits!
Posted on Reply
#31
bug
R0H1TYou do realize you can't straight up open a bank, a hospital, a bridge, heck your own form of govt ~ how is this any different? Yes it's greed, so is pretty much every other restriction forcing you into a "walled garden" or in fact modern day "democracy" :ohwell:

Basically this is EPIC being greedy themselves & for themselves, they're acting no differently than the "app stores" they're accusing of <whatever> in their lawsuits!
How do you figure? The prices directly from Epic are lower than going through said stores. So clearly they are passing the savings on to the customer.
Posted on Reply
#32
skizzo
SearingThe simple fact is that OS platforms are marketplaces, not stores. The store is the app store, and Apple is illegally restricting the market place to one store. Allow an Epic game store on iOS is the start. Time to fix this nonsense that only got started with the iPhone and is completely different from every other OS for the last 50 years.
this is an insightful way of looking at it that I never considered and I fully agree with you. What Apple is doing then, It's sort of creating a digital monoply on iOS/macOS basically. I'm not familiar with the google store at all but seems to be they are in the same boat of creating restrictions
Posted on Reply
#33
R0H1T
bugHow do you figure? The prices directly from Epic are lower than going through said stores. So clearly they are passing the savings on to the customer.
Apple and Google get a 30% cut right, where's the 30% saving you see in the images above? Clearly they're taking a cut themselves, now if you're saying they're being less greedy then that is your interpretation.
Posted on Reply
#34
Selaya
Oh, look. The problems are fighting themselves now.
Posted on Reply
#35
bug
R0H1TApple and Google get a 30% cut right, where's the 30% saving you see in the images above? Clearly they're taking a cut themselves, now if you're saying they're being less greedy then that is your interpretation.
There's a 20% difference. The rest id probably the cost of Epic running the servers themselves.
Posted on Reply
#36
ThrashZone
Hi,
Piece of the pie well I don't play games on cell but that is a big piece.
Add paypal slice of the pie for purchases too for other items.
Posted on Reply
#37
R0H1T
The same argument applies to Google and Apple. You're basically choosing between lesser of the two evils, again depending on your preference.
Posted on Reply
#38
bug
R0H1TThe same argument applies to Google and Apple. You're basically choosing between lesser of the two evils, again depending on your preference.
Meaning what? Stores should not charge for convenience?
At least on Android you can opt for alternate stores if you don't like Google's. No such luck on iOS.
Posted on Reply
#39
R0H1T
bugMeaning what? Stores should not charge for convenience?
At least on Android you can opt for alternate stores if you don't like Google's. No such luck on iOS.
Do you get that option on Epic Store?
Posted on Reply
#40
watzupken
I actually don't think Apple or Google is wrong to kick Epic out in this case from my opinion. EPIC runs a store selling games, which they happily charge game developers anything sold on it. Now in this case, they get charged for putting their game on the App Store and kicking a fuss out of it don't sound right to me. The App Store be it on iOS or Android works just like a super market where the game developer will buy shelf space to display their products. Except the case of app stores, the game developer don't pay a fix amount for shelf space, but rather a cut of the sales. 30% is very steep, that I don't disagree. But to try to operate in an App Store where they agree to abide by the rules and regulations, then subsequently try to game the system is not right. In a nut shell, with App Stores charging 30% on the apps sold, EPIC just have less opportunity to earn. Passing the savings to the consumer is just a smoke screen to try and justify their actions to freeload.
Posted on Reply
#41
bug
R0H1TDo you get that option on Epic Store?
Which option?
Posted on Reply
#42
zlobby
ChomiqMeanwhile in EPIC Store - haven't logged in for weeks. Try to claim Total War:



The game can be claimed for 24 hours. Yeah, good luck with that.
Put that to the long list of shenanigans from Epic.

I'd rather pay a few bucks more and know the storefront is legitimate and has my back, than to sell my soul to the devil for a pair of shoes.
Posted on Reply
#43
Vayra86
R0H1TDo you get that option on Epic Store?
Yes, you pick steam. You seem to have an issue separating A from B.
Posted on Reply
#44
zlobby
ZeppMan217In words of Ken Watanabe
They should Ro-Sham-Bo for it. Or as Cartman would say - I'll kick you square in the nuts! :D
Posted on Reply
#45
ExcuseMeWtf
Doesn't sound like Epic has much of a case at all.

And I'm sure their lawyers know it.
Posted on Reply
#46
Assimilator
Apple and Google are likely to find themselves in trouble here. Epic is not a small fish with little cash that can easily be bullied, and this suit being filed at the same time both stores are being scrutinised for potential antitrust violations is definitely no coincidence.

As for all those people saying "lol Epic has no case" - I suggest you understand the suit before you comment again.
CrackongIf they don't, then everyone will be putting their apps "Free" and everything are in-app purchases.

Mentioning steam is quite an example.
Imagine if every game is Freemium and steam does not benefit from in-game purchases.

Are they doing a charity or something ?
Just let you profit from their platform and use the server bandwidth for $0 ?
Counterpoint: if the app stores didn't take such a high percentage of in-game payments, there wouldn't be nearly as much of an incentive for game devs to bypass those stores' built-in payment mechanisms. In short, if the stores were less greedy, this wouldn't be a problem.
Posted on Reply
#47
bug
AssimilatorCounterpoint: if the app stores didn't take such a high percentage of in-game payments, there wouldn't be nearly as much of an incentive for game devs to bypass those stores' built-in payment mechanisms. In short, if the stores were less greedy, this wouldn't be a problem.
High percentage? 30% just because is more like protection money.
Posted on Reply
#48
Vayra86
Chloe PriceThat POS should be pulled off from the entire internet. Thanks Google and Apple :love:
You are so lost I think you cant even begin to realize it.

Thanks Google and Apple for destroying a marketplace we all have little options to escape - that is literally your line. How do you even think YOU benefit from this? By paying a 30% premium on in app purchases soon?!

I know its hard to see through the red EGS haze.. but man... do you even realize what you are saying. Independent publishers of the widest variety are finding their safe haven to preserve creative freedom in EGS. If you like your gaming as more than the hamster wheels that populate the big publishers like EA.... better start supporting Sweeney instead of fighting him. Steam or GoG wont save this.
Posted on Reply
#49
ExcuseMeWtf
As for all those people saying "lol Epic has no case" - I suggest you understand the suit before you comment again.
It really isn't that hard.

When you sign an agreement, you state that you have read, understood and agreed to its terms. If you don't like the terms, you can try to negotiate, however there is no guarantee satisfying terms will be reached. In which case no agreement is made. You don't get to sign agreement, which terms you don't agree with, then cry about it later.

What would make Epic exempt from this?

There is theoretically a possibility that terms of agreement violate existing laws, making it automatically null and void. Let me ask you however, what are the odds that two separate multi billion dollar corporations at the same time failed to notice this and formulate terms accordingly and this has not been noticed or brought to light by anyone for multiple years, when there were multiple parties signing such agreement over that timespan?
Posted on Reply
#50
Vayra86
ExcuseMeWtfIt really isn't that hard.

When you sign an agreement, you state that you have read, understood and agreed to its terms. If you don't like the terms, you can try to negotiate, however there is no guarantee satisfying terms will be reached. In which case no agreement is made. You don't get to sign agreemen,t with which terms you don't agree with, then cry about it later.

What makes Epic exempt from this?

There is theoretically a possibility that terms of agreement violate existing laws, making it automatically null and void. Let me ask you however, what are the odds that two separate multi billion dollar corporations at the same time failed to notice this and formulate terms accordingly and this has not been noticed or brought to light by anyone for multiple years, when there were multiple parties signing agreement over that timespan?
You signed so you are screwed generally doesnt work at this scale. Other considerations matter suxh as preserving a healthy and fair market and some sort of balance in power. Simply because unhealthy markets will crash and burn at some point. And we are paying that.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 15th, 2026 16:56 CST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts