
Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th - MBCook
https://twitter.com/EpicNewsroom/status/1295430127455596544
======
amaccuish
What took me aback was the withdrawing permission to notarise their apps for
Mac. That was only meant to be a check for known vulnerabilities/malicious
software. Apple was more within their rights to kick Fortnite until the dust
has settled from the iOS store, that was the retaliation, but now a mechanism
supposedly for security has been repurposed as punishment.

That's a pretty nasty move and I feel the mask has slipped slightly here for
Apple.

~~~
floatingatoll
Epic expressly snuck code through the door to activate a user-visible feature
in direct prohibition to App Store rules. Apple could have _revoked_ their
developer certificate in response, which would have essentially killed all
installations of Fortnite iOS/Mac worldwide within 24 hours. That they are
merely revoking their ability to sign new code and giving them 2 weeks to
perform an orderly shutdown is far less draconian than they're capable of
being here.

Notarization is about protecting users who are not capable of making an
informed decision about code safety from developers who refuse to comply with
Apple's terms of service. Epic willfully violated their terms with Apple to
make a point, and Apple is responding in the same way that they did to
Facebook: taking away their access to the users, because they cannot be
trusted to comply with the restrictions placed on their behavior.

Most (if not all) of the restrictions on the App Store exist to protect users
from app developers who prioritize their own greed over the rights of privacy
and safety that Apple promises the _users_ of the App Store. Developers are
the threat model, and there's nothing inherently wrong with Apple's response
to Epic declaring themselves a rulebreaker — and, thus, a threat.

(If Epic was not trying so hard to be able to sue for damages, they might have
been able to negotiate, same as Facebook did. But they wanted to be a martyr
for the cause, so here we are.)

Consider this thought experiment: At your employer, an IT employee goes rogue
and installs malicious code on your computer to read your email. How would you
feel if IT leadership said "they promised not to do it again" and allowed them
to continue unsupervised work on your computer while you're away? Most people
would feel awful, because you can't trust the IT employee's word — they
literally just broke their agreement not to snoop! — and because your
leadership clearly doesn't care about your privacy.

Should Apple "fire" Epic, now that Epic's word can no longer be trusted? This
answer should, in theory, match the answer above. I bet for most software
developers, it does not. I encourage thinking through that dissonance rather
than rejecting the thought experiment.

~~~
lapcatsoftware
> Notarization is about protecting users who are not capable of making an
> informed decision about code safety from developers who refuse to comply
> with Apple's terms of service.

No, notarization is about preventing malware. That's all. This has been
promised to us by Apple many many times. Malware prevention only. Fortnite is
not malware.

~~~
ryandrake
An application that suddenly changes behavior due to no action taken by the
user, triggered remotely by the developer, is getting very close to the
"malware" line in my book.

~~~
CobrastanJorji
A one day 10% off sale is a change in behavior due to no action taken by the
user triggered remotely by the developer. Is a sale very close to malware?

~~~
jachee
Depends.

Does the sale require me to submit payment details to a not-already-trusted
platform?

The change remotely triggered by Epic redirects users to a third-party (Epic)
payment system, but what if it were, say, a malicious Epic insider? How much
user payment info/cash could they grab before they were detected and disabled?

~~~
tfigment
They actually gave 2 options. If you didnt trust the game maker and their
discount you could continue paying the premium to Apple directly and continue
feeling safe.

~~~
AlexandrB
It's funny that this choice wasn't "offered" to console users who got the 20%
discount even as 30% still went to Sony/Microsoft. The two-tier pricing on iOS
was purely a stunt and had nothing to do with Epic's costs.

------
0x402DF854
From a preliminary statement of Epic's motion:

> Just over two weeks ago, Apple’s CEO Tim Cook was asked during a
> Congressional hearing whether Apple has “ever retaliated against or
> disadvantaged a developer who went public about their frustrations with the
> App Store”. Mr. Cook testified, “We do not retaliate or bully people. It’s
> strongly against our company culture.”

~~~
pwinnski
Some might see a difference between "a developer who went public about their
frustrations with the App Store" and a developer who deliberately violated the
policies and then filed a lawsuit and started an extensive PR campaign.

~~~
modeless
Epic needed to demonstrate that they and consumers were harmed in order to
have standing to sue. If Apple's policies are illegal then Epic is not bound
to follow them and retaliation is unjustified. It won't be known until it's
decided in court. That's why Epic's motion should be granted to prevent
retaliation until the court decides.

~~~
zip1234
How would Apple's policies be illegal? Epic entered a contractual agreement
with Apple and then knowingly and intentionally broke it in order to benefit
themselves.

~~~
laser
I'm not a lawyer, but presumably because there's US antitrust law, under which
the courts may find Apple's contractual impositions to be illegal. They may
also find they are legal, but if the court has any doubt they should grant
Epic's request to stop retaliation.

~~~
ChrisLomont
I doubt this is antitrust. There's a zillion other places to sell a game (as
Epic has shown). If you want to claim the entire market in question to be
Apple products, I doubt that will get very far. Everything is a monopoly when
you make your market hyper specific.

~~~
ben-schaaf
This isn't some hyper specific market. Mobile games are a $76 billion industry
(and rising) with the overwhelming majority of users only having access
through either the Google play store or Apple store.

~~~
ChrisLomont
$76B is world market. US law doesn't apply to a significant part of that.

Neither Apple nor Google is a monopoly in mobile games. By revenue Apple has
about 60%. Check [1], search threshold to see what cases often require.

Taken together they would be, but then you cannot prosecute Apple and win
without showing collusion between them and prosecute them both for collusion.

[1] [https://www.justice.gov/atr/competition-and-monopoly-
single-...](https://www.justice.gov/atr/competition-and-monopoly-single-firm-
conduct-under-section-2-sherman-act-chapter-2)

------
woofie11
This clearly and unambiguously crosses the line into abuse of market power.
Apple's actions before? Maybe? Sort of? Apple needed that 30 percent cut to
monitor for fraud and quality or something, going above-and-beyond other
payment processors.

This? This has absolutely no basis in anything. It's simple retaliation
designed to kneecap Epic from Apple's dominant control of a market. Apple can
refuse to let Epic release games, without stopping Epic's Apple development
dead in its tracks. That accomplishes all reasonable business purposes.

~~~
Razengan
> _Apple needed that 30 percent cut to monitor for fraud and quality or
> something, going above-and-beyond other payment processors._

How much do Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Gog and etc. take from
publishers on their stores?

~~~
josephcsible
That's a misleading question, because on other platforms you can choose to
avoid the store. A better question would be "what's the lowest cut you need to
give up to distribute to users of these other platforms?". And the answer to
that is zero on basically all of them except iOS.

~~~
baddox
> That's a misleading question, because on other platforms you can choose to
> avoid the store.

That's definitely not true. You cannot run unsigned code on most video game
consoles.

And for PC game marketplaces, those platforms still have market power. Surely
there's a big difference between being banned from Steam and being banned from
the Discord Store.

~~~
grishka
Video game consoles are specialized hardware. They do one thing and they do it
well. It's kind of understandable that these companies want to review anything
released for those. They want to ensure that games are of high quality so as
to not hurt the reputation of the platform itself. They want games to help
sell consoles. And that's how video game consoles always worked.

iPhones, on the other hand, are not specialized. They're general-purpose
devices at this point — both by design and by how Apple markets them. The
problem is, both developers _and_ users see the app store and its policies as
a nuisance.

~~~
Razengan
> _Video game consoles are specialized hardware._

No.

> _They do one thing and they do it well._

Look up console jailbreaks and home-brew.

> _The problem is, both developers and users see the app store and its
> policies as a nuisance._

Apple does a lot to protect users from unscrupulous practices. Look up the App
Store policies and see for yourself.

See:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24154647](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24154647)
and similar comments:

> the magnitude of this is not immediately apparent unless you’ve worked in an
> agency / freelanced building iOS applications. You have no idea how many
> user-hostile and abusive things I’ve seen blown completely out of the water
> with the golden phrase "Apple won’t allow that". It wins arguments in favour
> of the user instantly and permanently.

> I’ve run up against Apple’s capricious review process more times than I can
> count, so I’ve got more reason than most to complain about it. But it’s
> impossible for me to argue that these rules don’t help the user when I’ve
> personally seen it happen so many times. It’s a double-edged sword to be
> sure, and I believe the best way of balancing things in favour of the end-
> user is to be more open than Apple is, but there are undeniable benefits to
> the user with the current system.

~~~
grishka
> No.

You and I know that they're locked-down computers with hardware DRM and a bit
of custom silicon, but most users don't see them like that. To them, it's a
device that is only capable of running games.

> You have no idea how many user-hostile and abusive things I’ve seen blown
> completely out of the water with the golden phrase "Apple won’t allow that".

I'm an Android developer myself but I've seen iOS apps released, and I'm
friends with many iOS developers. You're going through this bureaucracy
lottery every time you release an update. You can never be sure of its
outcome, and you can never know how long it would take. Even most governments
are more predictable.

Sure there exist rules that are genuinely in the interest of the user. But
then there are rules that are in the interest of Apple as a business (the 30%
cut for digital goods). There also are rules that are following US laws, and
they're stringently enforced regardless of your target market because Apple
happens to be a US company.

~~~
baddox
> To them, it's a device that is only capable of running games.

And Spotify, YouTube, Netflix, live TV, Plex, home automation, web browsing,
Skype, etc. In other words, nearly everything an iPhone can do and probably
very near 100% overlap with how iPhones are actually used.

------
ping_pong
How is this legal? Apple is so blinded by their arrogance that they don't see
that this will lead to the App Store getting severely regulated.

Look at Uber for a great example. It took years, but Uber and Lyft were
finally handed a business-destroying law that will hurt them. It will only
take a few months for the rest of the US to adopt similar strategies as well.

After the congressional hearings a few weeks ago, Apple still doesn't
understand what is going on around them. If they keep going this route, they
will absolutely get themselves regulated and frankly I hope this happens.
Their arrogance is disgusting to me and I hope this eventual come-to-Jesus
moment will scare the shit out of them.

~~~
quotha
I hear ya, but something smells real bad about how Epic decided to wage this
war. They were clearly picking this fight, now I am not sure that was such a
good idea.

~~~
chillacy
It's not dissimilar to how civil disobedience in the 60s thoroughly planned
and tuned for maximum PR impact. Rosa Parks went on that bus knowing she'd
make a scene. Does that change the reality being uncovered?

~~~
breakfastduck
I dont think a massive company like Epic with all the bad practices they've
implemented themselves suing another mega rich company is anything like Rosa
Parks getting on that bus, though.

Intentions are important considerations with something like this.

~~~
chillacy
The part which OP disagreed with was the intentionality, and I likened it to
another example where the disobedience was deliberate. Of course with any
analogy other factors will be dissimilar.

It's interesting you point out the bad practices they have themselves as being
important though. The civil rights movement in the 60s boosted Rosa Parks
above Claudette Colvin even though they both could have had similar legal
battles only because of optics:

> For many years, Montgomery's black leaders did not publicize Colvin's
> pioneering effort. She was an unmarried teenager at the time, and was
> reportedly impregnated by a married man

Epic certainly shouldn't get to score virtue points here, but we shouldn't
require someone to be a saint to point out unfairness.

------
ocdtrekkie
This just seems like a dumb move on Apple's part. It's self-sabotaging. It
hurts their legal case, it hurts their public image, _and_ it hurts their
platform, as Unreal Engine is used in both iOS and macOS games. Not that many
people were getting Apple platforms for games before, but they've just shoved
one of the most popular engines off the platform.

If the judge grants Epic a TRO, Apple is going to be in deep crud. Should be a
good early sign of how the judicial system sees the case.

~~~
iJohnDoe
Agree 100%.

I also think Apple should stop collecting commission fees from all App Store
sales starting today. They have billions in the bank. What are those billions
for if not to invest back into the company and its developers. Foregoing all
commission fees is an easy way to do that and would make Apple a hero and help
developers. I’m also willing to be there would be a resurgence in the App
Store and bring in more sales and more developers.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
To be fair, I think they should probably still charge reasonable payment
processing fees. They need not depend on the App Store for profit though, they
should be able to drop the rate, and they should at minimum allow alternative
payment processors.

------
fishywang
My prediction is that this will backfire so badly for Apple.

Apple clearly underestimated how popular Unreal Engine is to game developers.
Apple probably expect developers to just switch to other engines when they
took UE away from them, but in reality most of the developers currently using
UE will just stop publishing on Apple's platforms because that's no longer a
profitable platform (consider the investment for developing for Apple's
platforms with new engine against the profit they can get there).

~~~
nabla9
I'm sure that Tim Sweeney has talked with Tencent (owns 40% of Epic) about his
plans beforehand. Tencent owns Riot Games (League Of Legends) and parts of
several other gaming companies. They also own WeChat,WeGame, QQ, etc.

Epic may be just a test case. Everyone else is watching and if Apple blinks,
they will side with Epic and Apple must give up huge revenue stream.

~~~
dx034
And if they don't and courts side with Apple, Tencent might be willing to pay
the damage. The upside across their companies is large enough to justify the
damage.

If courts side with Apple, Google might be next depending on their behavior
(Google has banned them but doesn't appear as aggressive yet).

------
rgovostes
From Epic's filing, here is an excerpt from Apple's notice listing the
Developer Program features that Epic will lose access to when its membership
is terminated:

    
    
        - All Apple software, SDKs, APIs, and developer tools
        - Pre-release versions of iOS, iPad OS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS
        - Pre-release versions of beta tools such as Reality Composer, Create ML, Apple Configurator, etc.
        - Notarization service for macOS apps
        - App Store Connect platform and support (for example, assistance with account transition, password reset, app name issues)
        - TestFlight
        - Access to provisioning portal for certificate generation, and provisioning profile generation
        - Ability to enable Apple services in-app (i.e. Apple Pay, CloudKit, PassKit, Music Kit, HomeKit, Push Notifications, Siri Shortcuts, Sign in with Apple, kernel extensions, FairPlay Streaming)
        - Access to Apple-issued keys for connecting to services such as MusicKit, DeviceCheck, APNs, CloudKit, Wallet
        - Access to Developer ID signing certificates and Kernel Extension signing certificates - Developer Technical Support
        - Participation in Universal App Quick Start Program, including the right to use the Developer Transition Kit (which must be returned to Apple)
        - Engineering efforts to improve hardware and software performance of Unreal Engine on Mac and iOS hardware; optimize Unreal Engine on the Mac for creative workflows, virtual sets and their CI/Build Systems; and adoption and support of ARKit features and future VR features into Unreal Engine by their XR team
    

The final item is very specific to Unreal Engine so it is clear that this is
not simply a template e-mail and was crafted specifically for Epic. Thus we
can assume that Apple legal, marketing, the executive team, etc. have pored
over every line intently (despite misspelling iPadOS).

My guess is that this is intended to enumerate everything that Apple
contributes to earn its 30% cut.

Epic themselves have now entered this list into the legal record, claiming
that it would be incredibly damaging for them to lose access to these
features. Perhaps it is now harder for them to argue that Apple's cut is
excessive.

~~~
fooey
Besides the Unreal the game engine, Epic has been making huge inroads
leveraging Unreal as a virtual movie set, as seen on Mandalorian.

I would assume most of the hardware used in movie production is Mac hardware,
so that entire initiative just went up in smoke.

~~~
dx034
Or Epic hoped for that reaction as it shows Apple's reaction to be out of
proportion. Just banning the game would've been a logical move but destroying
other businesses not related to the 30% cut in Fortnite could give them a much
stronger case and convince a judge that Apple's actions are retaliation, not
just a reaction to the violation.

I'd be very surprised if Epic hadn't considered this reaction by Apple.

------
jedberg
It's fascinating to see the replies to the tweets. It appears most people
don't care. They just want their game to work.

A lesson in how your customers don't care about how your product is made.

~~~
HeavenFox
A cursory scan of the Twitter thread suggests most people who have expressed
an opinion are on team Apple, blaming Epic for violating Apple's term of
service.

~~~
save_ferris
This is exactly what we get so mad at journalists about: we look at Twitter
and just assume it accurately reflects reality, when there’s no evidence
whatsoever that this is the case.

------
bob1029
Can someone give me compelling reasons for disallowing side-loading of
applications on iOS?

Hypothetically, if side-loading were to be allowed it could be buried under a
configuration+confirmation flag for security reasons just like with Android or
Windows 10.

Thinking more abstractly about this, I already do "sideload" iOS applications
when I sign them with enterprise/developer certs and perform OTA installs from
systems I control. Presumably, there is still some communication with the
mothership going on (certificate revocation checks), but the principles are
very similar...

~~~
theshrike79
A single human is smart, people are stupid.

They’ll install ANYTHING, no matter how hard it is and how shady the site is.
They can’t help themselves.

Then their phone is rooted by a bad actor and spreading malware. Who do they
blame? Themselves? The shady site? The creator of the trojan?

Nope. Apple. They’ll shout from the rooftops how Apple ruined their life and
business and remand restitution.

The easiest and most reliable way to prevent this is to lock people in a
walled garden and make sure they don’t poke themselves with anything sharp.
Yes, it sucks for the smart ones who know that shart things hurt, but that’s
the way it’s gotta be.

~~~
tobyhinloopen
People can “sideload” on mac os x and nobody is making a scene about their
mistakes of mac os x being insecure.

~~~
ulkesh
Different market, different historical reasons, and typically a much smaller
user base for MacOS than the iPhone.

Also, “sideloaded” apps on MacOS are most certainly suspect in Apple’s eyes,
so much so they put opt-in requirements around them. While I do see that as an
argument for allowing iPhone sideloading with similar opt-in requirements, you
can at least understand the market is considerably different for iPhone users
than for Mac users, even if there is an overlap between the two.

iPhones also, from a support perspective, are an order of magnitude (or close
to it) greater than that of MacOS. Seems reasonable to me for them to keep
their appliance locked down in this way.

------
fooey
Seems pretty straightforward to me.

If you sue me, and go out of your way to publically attack me, I'm not willing
to do business with you until it's settled, if ever again.

~~~
throwaw4y-plate
But can you be banned from doing business with millions of other people for
offending the gatekeeper?

~~~
Razengan
Why should Epic get to enjoy a market that Apple built without giving Apple
anything or following the rules of the platform?

Should anybody be able to post anything they want on HN or YouTube or Facebook
etc.? They can't.

Does Epic allow anyone to sell content for Fortnite without giving Epic any
money? They don't.

~~~
unchar1
Actually developers built the market. Without that Apps on the App store, the
iPhone is worth almost nothing.

~~~
52-6F-62
Not to clients like myself who bought it because of the security provided by
that locked-down environment. I'm not concerned about a game not being sold on
it. It provides for a host of other purposes.

~~~
m-p-3
If executed properly, those two seemingly opposed features could be achieved
and make more people happy.

Make it possible to unlock iOS ability to sideload apps, either through a
unique code, a security certificate, or a simple toggle and allows businesses
to lock down (but not remotely enable) this ability using their MDM.

Of course, put the usual disclaimer that enabling this feature could weaken
the device security, and don't simply enable it because an app or a website
told you so.

------
Animats
Note that this applies to Mac systems, not just IOS. Apple is trying to
prevent Unreal Engine from working on any Apple-controlled platform.

So, if you're a gamer or a game developer, _do not buy a Mac_. Developers now
using Macs need to be planning an exit strategy.

~~~
klmadfejno
The engine is open source isn't it? They can't stop you from downloading the
source and compiling it, right?

~~~
l3s2d
Source available, not open source.

~~~
klmadfejno
Ok, but is the general point accurate?

~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
No. You would be free to compile your copy of the Unreal Engine, but without
the ability to use Apple development software, it would be impossible for Epic
to continue developing the engine on Mac. The end result is that the engine
would not continue to develop on Mac, and would eventually likely stop
functioning.

~~~
dx034
Already with new ARM-based Macs, or have they already published a fully
working version?

------
fxtentacle
This is a wake-up punch to the face for every indie game studio considering
iOS.

I mean if Apple kicks out Fortnite and rejects access to the Fortnite team,
that seems like a reasonable retaliation for Epic breaking their rules.

But no, Apple is happily throwing hundreds of thousands of unrelated indie
developers under the bus, who started building their next game with the
(previously praised by Apple) iOS Unreal Engine and are now unable to release
updates and security fixes because Apple is actively preventing Epic from
building such fixes for the Unreal Engine.

Roughly 10 years ago, I used to be a happy Apple user and developer.

Clearly, the current Apple leadership considers iOS developers to be nothing
more than expendable minions.

------
stunt
Apple should allow alternative app stores. And they aren't going to do that
for as long as they can. So, it's good that some customers are publicly
complaining.

I don't think they can force Apple to allow alternative payment methods. But,
alternative app-store is reasonable.

~~~
shiburizu
Apple has been pushing for "services" under Cook ever since he took the helm.
Being forced to allow secondary app stores would undo all of that work.

------
redm
I'm not surprised by this.

From Apples perspective, Epic meaningfully bypassed key terms of the App store
which have been in force since the App store was created. Epic then turned
around and sued Apple. It also became clear they were planning for this
sequence to occur, in effect, trying to publicly shame Apple. I think I would
be surprised if Apple DIDN'T suspend their accounts. The signing on Mac is
just a side effect of loosing dev tools due to Epic's actions. Maybe they
should have sued first before taking action that would get them suspended.

That said, I am glad someone with the means is pushing back against the 30%
App Store rates. I value what Apple provides, but it is excessive for a
general computing device (unlike an XBOX, Leapfrog, etc).

~~~
cma
If you released an iOS app against the guidelines, such as counting up US
drone strikes, wouldn't it suck to have your unrelated OS X apps unnotarized
rather than just having your app removed? Notarization was supposed to be
about security.

------
Jonnax
I don't understand the comparisons to game consoles.

You buy an Xbox or a playstation, and it's a game playing machine. It just
plays video games.

You buy a mobile phone. And it's a general computing device.

It's very much arguable that it's necessary for modern life.

~~~
jdminhbg
The only thing that makes a game console only a game playing machine is that
it is limited by its producer. All the hardware is there for it to be a
general computing device.

So when you spool this argument out, it becomes: Google/Apple don't hobble
their devices as much as Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo do, therefore Google/Apple
should have to open them up more and Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo should not.

~~~
Jonnax
Well it's what it is up front. A games consoles plays games and streams some
video.

A mobile phone is a camera, gps, web browser, telephone, messaging, food
delivery, music listening, video watching, taxi calling, banking tool etc etc
etc device.

living your life, Apple and Google get 30% of your transactions.

~~~
jkrems
> A mobile phone is a camera, gps, web browser, telephone, messaging, food
> delivery, music listening, video watching, taxi calling, banking tool etc
> etc etc device.

I'm sure you know that you can do most if not all of those also from a game
console. Sure, it doesn't always have a camera or GPS but that's true for many
other general purpose computers as well. You can absolutely listen to music or
watch videos or do online banking from an XBox or Playstation.

~~~
ayoisaiah
You're not seriously trying to equate Xbox and iPhone usage in the same
category

------
mikl
Hard to interpret this as anything but petty spite from Apple’s side. There’s
no need to terminate their developer accounts for a violation of the _App
Store_ policy, nor does Apple usually do so.

I don’t generally like Epic, and used to be a big Apple fanboy, but in this
matter, I really hope the judge tears Apple a new one, this kind of abuse of
monopoly power needs to end.

------
LaGravedad
Doesn't Epic ban kids when they violate the Fortnite TOS? Epic knew what they
were doing. I have no sympathy for them.

~~~
username3
Epic doesn’t allow kids to use custom community made skins either. Kids are
afraid of getting banned.

~~~
microtherion
I've been wondering about that. So, by Epic's logic, doesn't that make them a
monopolist in the Fortnite in-app purchase market?

------
sircastor
A lot of this feels to me like Rpic thinks they’re a bigger deal than they
are. No doubt they make a lot of money, and they’ve made Apple a lot of money.
I think though that their attempt to take Apple in the court of Public opinion
is going to fall flat, because there are a lot more iOS users than Fortnite on
iOS players.

~~~
kodablah
> I think though that their attempt to take Apple in the court of Public
> opinion is going to fall flat, because there are a lot more iOS users than
> Fortnite on iOS players.

This naively assumes an iOS user is on Apple's side, and assumes that the
court of public opinion excludes those users with neither iOS nor Fortnite yet
have general opinions and business-stake on iOS options.

I should also note that, for some of us, the court of public opinion and the
court of legal opinion are different. I can disagree w/ Apple and disagree w/
their practices being deemed illegal.

~~~
sircastor
I think most iOS users don't actually care, but they know that they get their
phones from Apple, and some game company is trying to mess something up.

I agree that the legal and the PR plays are separate, but if Epic were just
trying to handle the legal issue, they wouldn't be making as big of a deal out
of it. They're expecting to get something else from this.

------
Solstinox
What the f*ck is going on at Apple?

~~~
Bud
It's more like, why did Epic decide to file a spurious legal action when their
situation with Apple is _exactly the same_ as their situation with Microsoft
(for XBox) and with Sony (for PlayStation) and with Google (for Android).

The only difference is that Sony just invested $250M in Epic. I'm sure that
minor fact has no relevance here, though. (sarcasm most certainly intended)

~~~
Solstinox
Epic's intent is clear. No need to ask why.

Apple's handling of the situation is baffling. "Let's martyr the smaller
company!"

~~~
xemoka
Every company is smaller than Apple (for certain definitions of "smaller").

------
noxer
The real question is why do they get a warning ahead? No indie dev would.

------
carabiner
Epic's "trap" seemed terribly tonedeaf. This will not end well for them.

~~~
ajkjk
Really? I got the opposite impression. Apple's tonedeafness and developer
hostility is finally being challenged by a (comparative) underdog.

~~~
Bud
Do you think that Google, Microsoft, and Sony are also hostile and tone-deaf,
then? One assumes so. All those platforms extract the same kinds of fees from
Epic that Apple does.

But mysteriously, Epic only wants to go after Apple.

~~~
donarb
Epic is suing Google as well, but not Sony or Microsoft.

[https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368363/epic-google-
fort...](https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368363/epic-google-fortnite-
lawsuit-antitrust-app-play-store-apple-removal)

~~~
Macha
They managed to break Steam's grasp over PC gaming (at least enough to get
their own games and some exclusives), they're trying for mobile now by taking
on Google and Apple, it's hard to think the next step won't be to stick it to
the console manufacturers if they have succeed

------
gridlockd
It seems strategically stupid to cut off the company developing the engine
that a lot of iOS games use to run from development tools. It's almost as if
they want iOS to be the worst platform to develop for.

As an iOS user, I hope Apple's stranglehold on the platform gets destroyed. I
didn't practically care for the longest time, but I'm starting to lose self-
respect here.

------
brainless
When I buy an Apple device, it isn't a computer, it's a rented Apple shelf.
That is what this roughly means.

Imagine Microsoft saying that I can not install Steam because Steam doesn't
agree to MS payment setup. You can't imagine because MS doesn't have that
control, it wanted to though, long back.

Apple has this control. It is bad for consumers.

------
tpmx
"Epic flagrantly disobeyed Apple's terms."

I keep reading this all over the Internet and it makes me so irrationally
angry that so many people are so ignorant.

Seriously, it seems like a very large part of people online think this
behavior from Apple is okay "because they set the rules".

~~~
TheCoelacanth
A large part of the population are bootlickers who want nothing more than for
a strong authority figure tell them how the world should work.

~~~
tpmx
The same person then turns on a dime to protest Trump...

------
namesbc
It is so frustrating that Apple has gotten away with such developer and user
hostility for so long. Maybe this will be the breaking point?

------
ErikAugust
What if Epic had decided it didn't want to support iOS anymore...

Is this all just something they may have wanted to achieve anyway?

------
almost_usual
So if the government doesn’t side with Epic or bail them out at this point are
they done for?

Seems like Epic put everything on the line.

~~~
jhloa2
Epic has more revenue streams than just Apple's ecosystems.

~~~
almost_usual
Didn’t Google just shut down their deal with OnePlus though?

I mean if they’re no longer on good terms with Apple or Google that has to be
a big chunk of their revenue stream?

~~~
Alupis
EPIC does exist outside of the mobile space.

They produce one of the top Cross Platform Game Engines, and produce many high
quality games, including Fortnite which was massive well before any mobile
version was produced.

------
alienreborn
Relevant: [https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/epic-v-
apple-8-17-20-768927327...](https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/epic-v-
apple-8-17-20-768927327.pdf)

------
renewiltord
I wonder what the story is behind the scenes and why Epic felt the need to
make this Hail Mary play.

~~~
foogazi
Someone looked at how much money they are making on iOS and multiplied it by
0.3

Imagine getting X% of everything you sell going forward without adding any
extra features - just by complaining

~~~
ascagnel_
I saw somewhere that Epic earned $500MM from the iOS version of Fortnite alone
in 2019 -- so Epic was looking at potentially $150MM USD/year.

------
627467
When will they start erasing apps from people's devices? That's what I'm
waiting for.

App store is an utility in iOS users hands as such it should be regulated as
utilities are.

------
lindnertim23
It seems to me Epic's goal here is to get Apple to allow side-loading on iOS.
But I happen to disagree with this remedy. I see no reason to set aside
Apple's Property rights with regard to their app store. My solution to this
issue would require Apple to be forced disclose all technical documentation
needed to write an independent operating system. Of course to be fair, this
would apply to every computerized device sold in the USA.

------
caiobegotti
As a game company I would expect Epic to have a massive strategy already laid
out just waiting to unfold and win this one otherwise it will all feel very
ironic.

------
jdhn
If Apple really wanted to screw with Epic, they would do this while
simultaneously encouraging Mediatonic to port Fall Guys to iOS.

------
wayneftw
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

I'm going to buy all of Epic's games tonight for my PC. In the past, I was a
bit annoyed that they plan to remove Rocket League from Steam but now that
they're fighting Apple, I love this company.

If this whole lawsuit thing doesn't work out, maybe they'll develop a phone so
I can buy that too.

~~~
AlexandrB
Spite's amazing. "I don't like Apple's walled garden, so I'm going to jump
into Epic's (Tencent's) walled garden instead." At no point does using, or
advocating for, a non-walled garden product come up as an alternative.

~~~
wayneftw
What an extremely shallow and thoughtless comparison you've made.

So, you don't think that supporting your enemies enemies is a good strategy??
Because it's a well-known and time-tested basic strategy that's been used the
world over.

Are you aware how much more impact Apple's products have on society than
Epic's does?? Do you understand how big Apple is compared to Epic?

Yes, I'm absolutely fine with a walled-garden for a bunch of games that are
sold across many platforms. Not for a piece of basic infrastructure, for
something that is so essential to all of our lives.

As a user, I want to be able to compile and install software on a device that
I own without having to re-up it every 7 days. As a developer, I want to give
my customers software that they asked for without having to negotiate with a
picky, asshole, power-hungry middle-man.

I have nothing against Tencent. Apple's done so much more to limit my freedom
while Tencent has hardly entered my thoughts for any amount of time.

------
gorgoiler
I know it’s incredibly wishful thinking, but perhaps an end result of this
saga will be for Apple to massively reduce their payment fees. I would love to
see Apple Pay deployed to more websites and online stores.

It is a real pleasure to use.

(The one downside is that it does mean I have to use the same email address
for each vendor.)

------
powerapple
I can feel Epic's pain, the 30% matters a lot when you are making big money.
Giving up 30% of 10 million feels very different than giving up 30% of 10k.
Giving the fact that the cost of reviewing apps, maintaining app stores are
fixed, Apple should have a cap for each app.

------
AlexandrB
As usual in these corporate pissing matches, those harmed are the customers.
Neither Epic nor Apple come out looking particularly good. Epic's publicity
stunt amounts to a marketing ploy and an attempt at hardball negotiation of
app store terms. But it does put the negative aspects of Apple's tight-fisted
control of iOS software into sharp focus and demonstrates why consumers should
be wary of total platform control by a vendor.

Stuck in the middle is anyone who enjoys[1] playing Fortnite on their iPhone.
I would love to see some kind of class action against both Apple and Epic if
Fortnite becomes unusable on iOS as a result of this contract dispute.

[1] Disclaimer: I think Fortnite sucks, but customers don't deserve to be used
as pawns in a contract negotiation.

~~~
NoPicklez
How else do you propose they go after Apple? Go through this process without
violating the app store?

Then most people would turn a blind eye to the issue because it hasn't
actually impacted them.

Yes the customer is impacted, but by impacting the customer with the right
message Epic can turn their customer base against Apple in the process.

Not only does it hurt the customer, but it also hurts Epic by cutting off a
massive chunk of their player base.

~~~
AlexandrB
> How else do you propose they go after Apple? Go through this process without
> violating the app store?

Epic is a huge company with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, not
some 10-man operation. They can hire lawyers and try to negotiate with Apple
for more favorable terms.

> Then most people would turn a blind eye to the issue because it hasn't
> actually impacted them.

Imagine if this was happening with Adobe and you're a professional that
depends on Adobe products (that you pay a large monthly fee for) to do your
job. Would you care who is "right" while your boss is breathing down your neck
for that project you can't do because Adobe decided to get in a pissing match
with Apple? I think you'd think twice about using Adobe products in the
future. So why is it OK for Epic to harm their own customers in an effort to
apply pressure on Apple? Personally, I'd feel pretty used.

And don't forget. Epic seems OK with continuing to pay Sony/Microsoft 30% on
their respective consoles.

~~~
NoPicklez
Firstly, this isn't just about Epic negotiating more favourable terms, as they
have said in the court papers. They're doing this to set a precedent for all
other app developers using the Apple app store, and of course trying to help
themselves in the process. However, Epic are not the only company to
experience these problems and therefore they believe they're standing up on
behalf of all others as well.

To your second point, all I can say is that this isn't Adobe. This is not a
professional piece of software which businesses pay a pretty penny for, this
is an early access video game. At the end of the day Epic would have weighed
up the risk associated with this case and its implications and yes it is
unfortunate that there are people in the firing line. But heck, its drummed up
a lot of news and discussion as a result of it, which is I'm sure exactly what
they want.

------
jimmaswell
I hope they become a martyr and this turns public opinion.

------
phendrenad2
After crippling Mac gaming by refusing to allow Vulkan/OpenGL, isn't Mac
already a niche platform for gaming? This is just Apple being petty in every
way imaginable, even if it doesn't hurt Epic Games at all.

------
qppo
What's the practical impact of this on Unreal support for MacOS/iOS?

------
muststopmyths
>That said, I do find one aspect of this second suit to be troubling for Epic:
Apple is threatening to terminate Epic’s developer account only if Epic
doesn’t revert Fortnite to the version that didn’t include its own in-app
payment system.[0]

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. But Epic's PR game is strong.

[0] [https://www.thurrott.com/apple/239199/apple-retaliates-
again...](https://www.thurrott.com/apple/239199/apple-retaliates-against-epic)

------
bfrog
Apple is looking to squeeze coin out of a stone to keep their stock holders
happy and financials looking good, rather than growing their products and
customers.

------
dubious_one
As someone who has not played Fortnite, I have a question. Can I as an
independent developer create mods or addons equal to what Epic sells using
their in game currency and have my mods, skins, etc work in the game? If not,
then are they not acting even more egregiously than Apple since Epic has now a
"Monopoly" on the Fortnite platform and refuses to allow others to monetize
it?

------
captainmarble
To bring up unfair issue, epic must first raise the issue legally, fight it in
court.. NOT breach TOS first then claim got abused.

~~~
dx034
They created urgency. A case otherwise could've taken years for a first
decision and would've been purely theoretical. They now need a decision within
14 days and can prove significant damage if the courts rule in Apple's favor
(whereas Apple's damage is negligible if they're forced to leave Epic alone
for a bit). The court case will be long either way but Epic can now show how
harshly Apple reacts to enforcing the 30%, something they couldn't have done
before.

------
deevolution
I dont think government intervention is the solution to resolving the problem
here. Epic is going to have to abandon Apple and suffer losses. What this
exposes is deep centralization of devices and app platforms and its disgusting
and I would expect a strong decentralized reaction to follow. It may not be
immediate, but it will happen.

------
amoitnga
Apple is abusive. long words, conversations.

I bought a device but do not control it - it's not legal or it shouldn't be.

------
cloudking
Will that break their existing installs?

------
vlod
Wouldn't it be REALLY interesting if Unity stood by Epic?

i.e. if Epic is forced to stop making games, Unity will no longer support our
engine on Mac either.

This I think would put a huge dent in games on the Mac platform. I wonder if
Apple would change their mind?

~~~
nouveaux
It would be interesting but why would they?

~~~
vlod
Generally standing up to a bully is noble, :) Or maybe if they stick together
they can change Apple's mind.

------
naikrovek
The number of Apple fans who don't understand what is happening (I'm talking
only about the facts, not opinion) is mind-blowing.

"Fan" is short for "fanatic" in this context, and that is an apt description.

------
TYPE_FASTER
I wonder if Epic could compile UE to WebGL in such a way that games would be
playable via web in Safari, not requiring a native app to be installed.

Are the limitations of WebGL too intractable for now?

------
munificent
This feels like watching the tech business equivalent to the run-up to WWI.
All these giants tangled up in contracts and economic leverage, bristling to
carve each other up.

------
udev
This reminds me of the Facebook vs Zynga debacle.

It did not go well for Zynga.

------
deevolution
I'm done with Apple. They have lost me as a customer.

------
tobyhinloopen
I love a good drama. This is movie material

------
lowbloodsugar
Don't see any evidence that this has actually occurred other than Epic saying
so.

------
qserasera
Too little too late. Now there are competing emotive arguments that bury the
lede.

------
avinoth
Apple took the "Fire your bad customer" way too seriously...

------
systemBuilder
I give Apple 6 months before they get broken up as an antitrust Monopoly!

------
jeffrallen
Christ, what assholes.

------
ffggvv
Epic should revoke Apple’s access to unreal engine ;)

------
quotha
This is not retaliation, it is consequences.

First comes an action, then a re-action.

(you can't switch 'em round for your own satisfaction)

------
drawkbox
> "Millions of developers rely on the Unreal Engine to develop software, and
> hundreds of millions of consumers use that software," argues Epic.

> "Developers that intend to sell their apps for use on iOS or macOS devices
> will have to forgo the Unreal Engine in favor of other engines," reads the
> motion.

That is what I was expecting after Epic went after Apple. They had to know it
would hurt them and all the devs using the engine.

Unity many times has feared not being able to build to Apple like in 2010 for
the JIT/AOT item which led to more AOT and eventually C++ IL2CPP to get the
requirement of native over virtual machine based engines (it was ultimately
unnecessary and later Mono included AOT). [1]

Epic had to know this would be VERY risky and now they have put all their devs
at risk who target iOS. Who knows that type of fallout this will have long
term. It is a battle of greed and not better products and that is what sucks.
I don't like the way Epic is going about this at all. Not only is Epic being
used by Tencent, they are using devs and their engine to mount a greed based
attack on Apple.

No one is happy fully with all the App Store rules, and likewise no one is
happy with all the Epic Game Store rules, but the platform maker has immense
power and Epic knew what would happen. They pull the same type of stuff like
when they blocked Miguel de Icaza's Mono/C# extension to UnrealEngine.
[https://twitter.com/migueldeicaza/status/1294445857266372611](https://twitter.com/migueldeicaza/status/1294445857266372611)

Yeah I mean look at what Epic/Tencent did, they baited Apple hard. This was a
play all along.

[https://twitter.com/stroughtonsmith/status/12939179293654138...](https://twitter.com/stroughtonsmith/status/1293917929365413895)

The worst is Epic/Tencent is going about this like they are doing it
altruisitcally when their end goal is more power/take. They want their own app
store on Apple and they want to have their own approval and their own take
(Epic store is 12% as they are trying to catch Steam/Origin/others).

Thanks for thinking of the devs Tencent/Epic /s

The biggest bummer is I really look up to Tim Sweeney and respect all he has
done for gaming. I hate that he ok'd this. Epic has 3 seats on the board and
Tencent has 2, with 2 "observers" which are probably Tencent loyal. So at some
point along the line Sweeney had to ok this... Looks like the Tencent money
leverage got to him. He knew this would cause problems for devs that chose HIS
engine. Why Tim Why. The battle of the Tims but ultimately greed that I am
sure will lead to regulation that makes it worse for devs long term.

[1] [https://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/07/02/unity-and-
ios-4-0-updat...](https://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/07/02/unity-and-
ios-4-0-update-iii/)

~~~
cma
Epic also allows free to play games to set up their own payment systems and
pay 0%.

~~~
drawkbox
If Apple waived the 30% take if you used GameCenter or their game kits you
think that would be seen as anti-competitive? Yes. What you have described is
Epic engaging in anti-competitive behavior that isn't yet because they are the
smaller of the store players.

I think people are short-sighted in what Apple did for gaming. Just go back to
2007.

Before Apple the only way to make a game was flash/PC with no markets other
than sites.

Consoles and handhelds were for selected larger game studios only. Consoles
always took 30% and it was near impossible to dev on them, very few indie
programs.

Apple changed the game.

Apple opened up game development especially handheld.

That success of the App Store led to Google Play!.

It led to Unity and Unity Asset Store (which also takes 30%).

That led to Steam opening up (which also takes 30%). It even led to Epic Games
store.

It also led to engines like Unity/Unreal being simplified. Unreal at one time
was $300k per title, same with Valve, same with other engines. Now those are
essentially free.

I sometimes think that Apple takes heat, yes some of their rules are annoying,
but compared to consoles and the way it was before Apple it is massively
better for indies/small/medium game companies. Mobile is in a space between
open and console.

Epic is biting the hand that feeds here, and Unity would never even attempt
something like this. I think Epic is pushed by Tencent to do this and there is
deeper reasoning for this, but they are selling it as "for the greater good"
which is a lie.

~~~
cma
> Apple opened up game development

No, Apple II already had game devs selling stuff by mail without paying Apple
30%, in a much more open way.

~~~
google234123
Who cares about that? Steve Wozniak also gave away the design for free at
first, does that mean that apple has no copyright protection on their
computers?

~~~
cma
No, but if true it does mean Apple closed future designs, not opened them.

------
koiz
crocodile tears

------
draw_down
I don’t have a side in this fight, but I do admire how Epic has clearly
planned this out to wring every ounce of publicity and goodwill they can.

I don’t find this particular measure (shutting down the accounts) particularly
sinister. Epic has made it abundantly clear they don’t like the App Store’s
rules and regulations. That’s fine but it means you won’t be selling on the
App Store. I see this as Apple taking them seriously on that point.

We are well past the point of negotiations here. And following from the
planning point, there is zero chance Epic did not see this coming.

~~~
fooey
I don't think they planned this well at all. It feels like rage fueled
flailing they didn't think through.

What is it going to do for Epic's cash flow if they're not allowed on any app
stores for literal years while court cases filter through? What is it going to
do for their game store and engine selling business to be indefinitely evicted
from the Apple ecosystem entirely?

Were I a company using Unreal Engine to develop a game, expecting to target
Apple hardware, I would not be very happy about the stunts Tim Sweeney is
pulling.

~~~
philistine
At this point in the fight, Epic has not fired its biggest cannon: announcing
that Unreal Engine 5 will not support any Apple hardware.

So at this point, there is uncertainty, but no clear harm done to any
developer using Unreal engine and currently targeting Mac hardware.

~~~
kllrnohj
UE5 not supporting any Apple hardware would hurt Epic far more than Apple as a
result, as it would just drive mobile games back to Unity, which is already
the market leader in the mobile space.

~~~
grumple
You sure about that? Apple already has a bad rep for software not working on
Mac. Not many are gaming with macs. I own one game that's mac-compatible and
it crashes a lot. Mac is great for dev and design/art related pursuits... and
that's about it.

------
username3
Apple doesn’t get 30% when retailers sell iTunes gift cards.

~~~
joekrill
But they do once the consumer spends that gift card. So charing 30% for the
gift card would sort of be charging the Apple tax twice, wouldn't it?

~~~
username3
If retailers get 20% of a $100 iTunes gift card, then Apple gets $10, the
developer gets $70, and the retailer gets $20.

Epic should sell iTunes gift cards.

------
pearjuice
For years, people have applauded the walled garden of Apple and this is the
end result. Without flamethrower you wil not get out of it. The walls have to
go down. They are probably beting on that by this charade the entire industry
turns against Apple and a boycott ensues, leaving them no choice to change
their margins (and other marketplaces will adjust accordingly or the angry mob
comes for them).

I doubt Epic stands any chance in court. Apple's case seems to be water sealed
as with every ToS signed, you waive any and all of your rights away. Clearly
the ToS have been violated so they seem to be in their right.

~~~
grumple
ToS doesn't mean you can break federal antitrust laws.

~~~
pearjuice
What antitrust laws are they breaking?

~~~
grumple
I suggest taking a look at Epic's lawsuit, which was written by several
antitrust experts.

------
davidg109
Epic is trying to shine a spotlight on what they think is unfair, and I flat
out disagree. They want to now sue the same company that provides them tools
to develop, as if it’s some inherent right? Apple owns the Apple store, and
they can choose to charge what they want. Epic can choose to raise their
pricing if they feel the millions they’re already making isn’t enough.

~~~
davidg109
Bring on those downvotes :) I’m looking forward to an ‘epic’ court ruling
siding in Apple’s favour.

------
muska3
Is it bad that I hope they do kill Epic's account?

Epic launches a preconceived plan with media attacks and the most ridiculous
1984 reference that actually doesn't make sense in the current context against
Apple. If I'm Apple, even if this is a straight up attack on me, I just follow
the rules in my TOS and block them like I do others who don't follow the TOS.
If you don't like the TOS, fine you don't have to be on my platform and have
access to my users. It's as simple as that. The fact that so many are
rebelling against this, is actually good for consumers in the long run, they
may flock to other platforms albeit there's now only two viable platforms,
Apple and Android. Windows got bit by the dust, but I do wish they were still
around to create a healthy three ecosystem battle.

Epic's a billion dollar company with huge resources fighting another billion
dollar company. It's kind of hilarious watching this pan out, with Epic
pretending to be some small indie corporation fighting a huge conglomerate.

~~~
dstaley
> I just follow the rules in my TOS and block them like I do others who don't
> follow the TOS

I'm fairly sure Apple doesn't terminate the developer account simply for
failing an app review. I think this is a specific executive decision based on
the fact that Epic is unlikely to rectify the issue, which could be seen as
retaliation.

~~~
ArchOversight
That's what's in the Developer Program License Agreement though:

Section 11.2 Termination, subsection (f):

> (f) if You engage, or encourage others to engage, in any misleading,
> fraudulent, improper, unlawful or dishonest act relating to this Agreement,
> including, but not limited to, misrepresenting the nature of Your submitted
> Application (e.g., hiding or trying to hide functionality from Apple’s
> review, falsifying consumer reviews for Your Application, engaging in
> payment fraud, etc.).

In this case Epic hid functionality from Apple's review, with the intent to
bypass further rules in the Developer Program License Agreement.

Apple is allowed to terminate the agreement at that time.

~~~
dstaley
Sorry, to clarify, I wasn't trying to imply that what Epic did wasn't against
the TOS. My point was that Apple has the authority not to terminate Epic, but
has chosen to do so, even when they've allowed other apps that have done
things against the TOS to retain their developer account.

~~~
ArchOversight
There's a way to cure a breach in the license agreement, and other developers
that have run afoul of the rules and were notified made fixes that brought
them back into compliance with the agreement.

Epic has made it particularly clear that they do not intend to cure the
breach, and Apple has made it clear that in that case they are not welcome to
have an Apple Developer Program account and the permissions that grants a
user.

~~~
dstaley
I think we're on the same page here. Are you saying that the application of
Apple's TOS can't be considered retaliation since it's something Epic agreed
to be held to?

------
Despegar
Epic's antitrust case against Apple is very weak, but they're well within the
right to sue Apple to resolve their dispute. The developer agreement actually
stipulates the venue, Northern District of California, for any lawsuits.
However, Epic demonstrated particularly bad faith in how they've dealt with
this matter so I'm not surprised that Apple is terminating their relationship
(which they're allowed to do under the terms of the developer agreement).

~~~
coldcode
Yes I also believe its a lousy case, but that what courts are for, to decide
things. But Apple can easily point to all the times Epic agreed to the
Agreement (my employer's large legal dept always reads any changes before
agreeing), to the agreements Epic is fine with from the console companies
paying the same percentage but did not sue, the long history of each and every
clause in the agreement in the world of contract law (Apple has a billion
lawyers I doubt they miss much).

Winning such a case based on complaining its an antitrust violation is rather
quixotic and normally only a government would do this.

Maybe in the end both relent and the rate goes down, but I don't think Epic
wants to pay anything and still be available.

~~~
Wohlf
I believe Epic's entire case revolves around phones being a general computing
device, so they'll be using the Microsoft antitrust case law.

~~~
Despegar
>I believe Epic's entire case revolves around phones being a general computing
device

Legally this doesn't matter at all. It's just something for people to talk
about on Twitter.

