I wouldn’t normally find an article like this of interest for HN, but the original claims that Apple was terminating sign in with apple were repeated widely here and taken as true.
It seems there was, in fact, no evidence for these claims other than Epic saying so. Notably Epic did not publish any documents from Apple, and as Gruber points out it would be against Apple’s interests to cut off people who used Sign in with Apple.
On the internet false claims spread widely and the corrections rarely make it as far. So I think it’s worth considering this article, especially in light of the judicial hearings today where the judge in charge of the case treated many of Epic’s arguments as non credible or unsupported.
They explicitly disobeyed Apple’s legal rules; got removed just like any other developer who does, and sued them in response. It doesn’t require the judge to have a lot of tech knowledge to roll their eyes at this obvious trolling.
If you walk into a store, and refuse to pay tax on something, it’s not going to go well for you. It doesn’t matter if you think tax is unfair. That’s part of what you agree to when you enter that store and purchase a product from them. Everyone who enters that store knows they have to pay tax. We all agree to. Sometimes we agree to change those taxes when we as a society democratically agree those taxes are not fair. But not my straight up not paying them. This is called fraud, and Epic skipping out on the 30% with its back door switch could potentially be seen as such legally if a significant enough profit was made.
While people do it all the time; a sensible person is not just going to skip out on paying taxes because they feel a particular tax is not fair. They can help fight to change those taxes, or the laws surrounding them; to create a more better/more balanced solution, but if a business suddenly flipped a switch that stopped them from paying taxes the IRS is going to be pounding down their doors extremely quickly.
Apple is only even a monopoly within the Apple ecosystem and it is what partly defines their ecosystem. If you don’t like it, there’s a fantastic, open-source alternative! (Android) Which even has F-Droid, etc; if you feel you also really need your choice of app stores on your choice of platform.
I am positive this is the logical justification the judge could easily give to rule in Apple’s favour.
I’m not even sure why they are wasting the legal fees on this, when the way they went about it assured it could never succeed, legally.
I highly doubt they could not make more money from outright selling the game for months? It’s not super logical to me.
Sure, create a lobby with some other companies to go all in together to legally fight something like this, or something. Don’t just try to sneak around not paying fees and then sue them when they find out. Come on.
The charitable interpretation is that Epic misunderstood the consequence of being kicked off the App Store and assumed that SIWA would stop working as well. The uncharitable one is that Epic spread FUD so SIWA users would convert to email/password logins and Epic would have a more direct line to them.
Epic's outright lie in their help document makes me lean towards the uncharitable interpretation:
> Apple previously stated they would terminate “Sign In With Apple” support for Epic Games accounts after September 11, 2020, but today provided an indefinite extension.
Sign in with Apple is tied to the developer account. I'm guessing it was assumed that it would be disabled since Apple released a statement saying they were terminating Epic's account.
John Gruber gets special access to Apple - and in return asks softball questions and is never too critical (that's my take anyway).
That is my take as well. I am giving Epic the benefits of doubt here. I am guessing the letter to Epic likely state all Apple Services relating to developer account. ( With no mention specifically for SIWA ). Epic took it as it is.
The point that Apple require and need to take special care to make sure SIWA works without developer account is the interesting part.
> We have no proof that Apple ever communicated that to Epic.
> Epic did not lose access.
> So where does that leave us?
I think it was a fair assumption by Epic to assume that Sign in with Apple would stop working when their Developer Account was terminated. SIWA is tied to a Developer Account.
My guess is Apple quickly did some work or made an exception so Epic could keep authenticating users.
> Update: In a statement, Apple confirmed the account has been removed and said it's disappointing that the termination had to happen.
> "We are disappointed that we have had to terminate the Epic Games account on the App Store . We have worked with the team at Epic Games for many years on their launches and releases. The court recommended that Epic comply with the App Store guidelines while their case moves forward, guidelines they’ve followed for the past decade until they created this situation. Epic has refused. Instead they repeatedly submit Fortnite updates designed to violate the guidelines of the App Store . This is not fair to all other developers on the App Store and is putting customers in the middle of their fight. We hope that we can work together again in the future, but unfortunately that is not possible today."
> Apple says that the termination applies only to the Epic Games developer account, and it occurred after Epic Games was provided with 14 days to comply with the App Store rules. The removal of the Epic Games account is Apple's standard process for all accounts that defy App Store policies.
Edit: (Had some timeline stuff here, but the dates were wrong.)
I guess we disagree on what terminating the developer account implies. Like Epic, I would expect to lose everything you do in there - including SIWA.
This would be a boneheaded move for Apple for them to cancel SIWA when a developer lost their developer account.
I don’t mean just in the case of a public uproar like this. But, if someone decided not to pay the $99 fee. Perhaps because they decided to abandon their app and go web only.
It would ruin Apple’s credibility completely if you can’t trust your IDP not to abandon you.
It seems there was, in fact, no evidence for these claims other than Epic saying so. Notably Epic did not publish any documents from Apple, and as Gruber points out it would be against Apple’s interests to cut off people who used Sign in with Apple.
On the internet false claims spread widely and the corrections rarely make it as far. So I think it’s worth considering this article, especially in light of the judicial hearings today where the judge in charge of the case treated many of Epic’s arguments as non credible or unsupported.