Apple vs Epic Games trial kicks off featuring the same old arguments, hundreds of angry Zoombombing tweens

Apple and Epic Games met in California federal court on Monday, kicking off a bench trial with potentially radical consequences for how software is distributed and monetised on closed mobile ecosystems like iOS. The formal commencement of the trial follows months of legal wrangling, prompted by Apple's decision to ban the …

[Anonymous Coward]

"anyone can opt to use alternative platforms"

Can I install an alternative platform on a iPhone or iPad?

And that was true for Windows as well... and there was no hardware block. I've used OS/2 3 for a while myself, until it was true nobody would develop application for such system - because of MS dominant position.

And I would like to see Microsoft kill Office applications on macOS and iThings... and tell for "security reasons" you need to use them on Windows only. Apple would lose a lot of the exec/managers market.

[John70]

Re: "anyone can opt to use alternative platforms"

Was thinking the same thing, can I install Android on an iPhone?

[Aristotles slow and dimwitted horse]

Re: "anyone can opt to use alternative platforms"

I think you've intentionally missed the point. I read this to mean that Apple see "platform" as both the hardware and software layer combined.

Still, nice of them to keep 30% of my (sometimes) hard earned cash just to "protect" me eh? Can someone get them to explain how? And once they have validated that that transaction has been made "securely" why they aren't only charging a couple of cents on the $ like my bank does.

I'm with Epic on this.

[Flak]

Re: "anyone can opt to use alternative platforms"

It is a 'protection racket'!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "anyone can opt to use alternative platforms"

I would like to see Microsoft kill Office applications on macOS and iThings

Be my guest. We already dropped all of that for security reasons.

[MrMerrymaker]

I want Epic to win

I suppose.

[big_D]

Re: I want Epic to win

As Captain Aubrey said, "you [sholuld] always choose the lesser of two weevils"

[@infosec_jcp]

Re: I want Epic to win

EPIC *WIN* *tumbsupgif.gif*

*lol.gif*

[jason_derp]

HA

"...deprived the company of "millions" in revenue which it could have reinvested in the business, and resulted in higher costs for users."

Ho ho my! Oh dear, that's charming. Look, we're all having fun, but let's move this along, Epic. Save your amateur-hour trash-brain standup for a group too drunk to become a victim of your mass-murdering of neurons. Ho boy. Did have a chuckle though.

[gerryg]

Epic must have been asleep at the wheel

It's not as if Apple don't have form on protecting their business model.

And if Epic win the first round then there will be an appeal. If after all forms of appeal have been exhausted the level of the award will challenged. Time and lawyers fees wait for no-one.

I doubt if Epic's pockets are deep enough to survive this.

It's never about being right. It's about choosing your partner carefully.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Epic must have been asleep at the wheel

It is pointless hearing any case like this in any court except the highest.

Whoever loses, they will appeal this in the next highest court. This will keep repeating until it reaches the highest court. Working in lower courts in cases like this, is the epitome of a pointless exercise - your time, deliberations and skills are meaningless, irrelevant. But at least you get paid.

Both sides should be asked at the start: "If you lose at this stage will you appeal?". If both sides say yes, they both pay what it would have cost them (including own lawyers fees) to the lower court and the lower court gets skipped.

[User McUser]

Re: Epic must have been asleep at the wheel

I doubt if Epic's pockets are deep enough to survive this.

From the article: "Fortnite was the highest-grossing game in 2019, with revenues of $1.8bn across all platforms, including iOS, Android, Xbox One, PC, and the PS4." [Emphasis added.]

I know lawyers can be expensive, but I think Epic will be just fine.

[Anonymous Coward]

Higher cost for users?

Were the [thing you buy for Fortnite] more expensive on Apple platforms than elsewhere?

If no, then there was no higher cost for users.

If yes, but users were free to buy it online and apply it to their Fortnite on Apple app, then no problem?

If yes and users were still paying it, then why didn't Epic raise their prices everywhere else, seeing as the market would apparently have accepted it?

All that aside though, I guess it's good enough to challenge this, I just really wish it was someone other than Epic doing it - since I find that them to be deceptive and manipulative towards ... well everyone I suppose.

[Anonymous Coward]

Epic are throwing a lot of money around

Epic's timed-exclusives on their store cause a few grumbles among the game-playing public. If you were wondering how much they paid for one notable example, Borderlands 3, check out:

https://wccftech.com/borderlands-3-six-month-pc-store-exclusivity-cost-epic-115-million/

$80M guarantee, $20M non-recoupable fees and $15M in Marketing commitment. They made $77M in the first two weeks of sales.

Epic aren't suing Apple out of any noble motives. This is all about money, and a lot of it.