Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Banned Epic Games' Developer Account, So How Is Fortnite Coming Back to the U.S. App Store?

L
surferfb said:
No, Epic put in app purchases into its app that completely bypassed Apple’s payment system. Not a link.


Epic wanted Apple to be declared a monopoly and be forced to accept alternate app stores. They didn’t get that. They got something better than they had before, but I wouldn’t classify “losing on 9 of 10 counts” a win.
Click to expand...
Ok
If epic lost then why is Apple getting compelled to implement things that will change the iOS App Store that Apple never did before?
If as you claim that epic lost big time then why is Spotify putting a link in their iOS app for access to subscribing and now having the ability to offer promotions
Bypassing the current iOS App Store rules & regulations setup by Apple
That they are now getting forced to change for everyone

That is why it’s a win
 
  • Like
Reactions: dominiongamma
Stuwil said:
L

Ok
If epic lost then why is Apple getting compelled to implement things that will change the iOS App Store that Apple never did before?
If as you claim that epic lost big time then why is Spotify putting a link in their iOS app for access to subscribing and now having the ability to offer promotions
Bypassing the current iOS App Store rules & regulations setup by Apple
That they are now getting forced to change for everyone

That is why it’s a win
Click to expand...
It is not a win for Epic before Epic store is available on iPhone, with no payment to Apple. That is what their goal is. Being allowed to use alternate payment methods in-app, is not what Epic is looking for.

I guarantee you that if Apple removed any fee on the app store tomorrow, but still require you to use the app store to deliver apps, Sweeney would find new ways to complain.

This is what Sweeney has said on X:

“
NO FEES on web transactions. Game over for the Apple Tax.

Apple’s 15-30% junk fees are now just as dead here in the United States of America as they are in Europe under the Digital Markets Act. Unlawful here, unlawful there.”

But the 15-30% fees are NOT unlawful in Europe, nor are they dead now that we (I’m in Europe) are free to use other means. BY FAR most of the apps that used app store purchasing before, still do. Tim Sweeney is full of hot air. I’m not entirely sure why 15% fee on app store is a “junk fee”, while a 12% fee on Epic store is not.

All that said, I do not condone Apple’s behaviour in this case. But it’s a fight between two bad guys, there is no hero here.
 
i wonder how much money both companies have squandered while all of this has been going on
 
Velli said:
It is not a win for Epic before Epic store is available on iPhone, with no payment to Apple. That is what their goal is. Being allowed to use alternate payment methods in-app, is not what Epic is looking for.

I guarantee you that if Apple removed any fee on the app store tomorrow, but still require you to use the app store to deliver apps, Sweeney would find new ways to complain.

This is what Sweeney has said on X:

“
NO FEES on web transactions. Game over for the Apple Tax.

Apple’s 15-30% junk fees are now just as dead here in the United States of America as they are in Europe under the Digital Markets Act. Unlawful here, unlawful there.”

But the 15-30% fees are NOT unlawful in Europe, nor are they dead now that we (I’m in Europe) are free to use other means. BY FAR most of the apps that used app store purchasing before, still do. Tim Sweeney is full of hot air. I’m not entirely sure why 15% fee on app store is a “junk fee”, while a 12% fee on Epic store is not.

All that said, I do not condone Apple’s behaviour in this case. But it’s a fight between two bad guys, there is no hero here.
Click to expand...
Yes Tim Sweeney wants the epic game store on iOS & android

However your missing the point by taking Apple to court he has managed to get them to change their rules on the iOS App Store for every developer going forward and that junk fee as he calls it of 15% or 30% will more than likely disappear to about 12%
So then he will get what he wants because Apple refused to budge on that figure for them.

There is a big difference between a 3rd party App Store in the EU to a payment link in an app on iOS because now if I download Spotify for example within the App Store
I can now click on a link within the app to subscribe and that is why Apple don’t want it because it will bypass this 30% IAP fee & then reduce their profits
 
Stuwil said:
Yes Tim Sweeney wants the epic game store on iOS & android

However your missing the point by taking Apple to court he has managed to get them to change their rules on the iOS App Store for every developer going forward and that junk fee as he calls it of 15% or 30% will more than likely disappear to about 12%
So then he will get what he wants because Apple refused to budge on that figure for them.

There is a big difference between a 3rd party App Store in the EU to a payment link in an app on iOS because now if I download Spotify for example within the App Store
I can now click on a link within the app to subscribe and that is why Apple don’t want it because it will bypass this 30% IAP fee & then reduce their profits
Click to expand...
But I don’t think Sweeneys goal is to avoid paying Apple’s fee. I think his goal is to be able to charge his own fee. I don’t think Sweeney will consider it a “win”, if Apple’s fee is lowered to 12 or zero for that matter, if he can’t have his own store.

Side note: I’m not big into gaming, but it doesn’t seem to me that developers are leaving Steam for Epic, even though Steam charges 30%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: surferfb
surferfb said:
I agree 100% that Apple should let them back on the store (for PR purposes), but given Apple’s reaction to date, I really don’t think they will. Especially when the judge who made the recent decision regarding app linking has already ruled Apple doesn’t have to.
Click to expand...
Wait, I thought the whole point of this was they have to let them back in. The legal system is so confusing.


Velli said:
That doesn’t make sense. It’s a very simple ban, that can be lifted probably by changing one entry in some database. It’s not like Apple is running around chasing Epic to be able to block them. If they don’t want to lift the current ban, why would they allow a new account from the same company?

Approving an app is not “doing nothing”. It is an actual review process where Apple actively approves the app. There is no scenario where Apple “looks the other way”.
Click to expand...
That’s my point. If they get a request then it’s a prompt to make a decision. The current ban is a status quo without a specific timeline.
 
dannyyankou said:
I understand Epic Games broke rules that were in place at the time. But if a judge determined those rules were illegal, Apple should reinstate their developer account.
Click to expand...
The rules were not deemed illegal until after the ban. I agree with apple on this one.
 
I don't believe him for a moment. This supposed workaround with the Epic Sweden account is so shady and dumb, it can only be a ruse. "Sweeny has spoken to Apple".... Says him. Names Tim; give us names, otherwise shut up. He's going to try to use the Swedish account, and then pitch a fit when it gets banned for attempting to circumvent the original ban.
 
davide_eu said:
Have you ever played to Fortnite?
Click to expand...
Pay no attention to the boomers behind the curtain. Nobody who has played fortnite for more than 10 minutes thinks it's trash. It may not be your preferred genre, or style, or whatever, but there's no denying its quality or cultural presence... and it's friggin' free-to-play with no pay-to-win mechanics whatsover. I wish Epic weren't such a horrible corporation, but Fortnite is a pretty great game.
 
russell_314 said:
Wait, I thought the whole point of this was they have to let them back in. The legal system is so confusing.
Click to expand...
Nope. Epic lost that point (and a bunch of others). Apple isn't a monopoly, Apple doesn't have to allow third party stores, Apple was within its rights to kick Apple off, Apple wasn't in violation of federal antitrust law, etc. The only point Apple lost was the one about link outs (and the judge said Apple was allowed to charge a commission on those link outs until Apple ignored her order) because of a California state law.

The court case was a massive win for Apple until Apple shot itself in the foot by being stupid about complying with the one relatively minor point they lost on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Velli and russell_314
surferfb said:
Nope. Epic lost that point (and a bunch of others). Apple isn't a monopoly, Apple doesn't have to allow third party stores, Apple was within its rights to kick Apple off, Apple wasn't in violation of federal antitrust law, etc. The only point Apple lost was the one about link outs (and the judge said Apple was allowed to charge a commission on those link outs until Apple ignored her order) because of a California state law.

The court case was a massive win for Apple until Apple shot itself in the foot by being stupid about complying with the one relatively minor point they lost on.
Click to expand...
If it’s a minor point
As you claim then Apple would have complied with the order just like when any other government tells them to
However Apple as a company clearly doesn’t want payment links on apps as it will hurt
There IAP business model or else they would have already implemented it.
 
Velli said:
I loathe “if Jobs were alive” arguments, but I’ll make an exception: Jobs would have driven the company to the ground before letting Tim Sweeney tell him what to do.
Click to expand...
Even if it led to a fist fight in the middle of apple park. Now that's something I would find worth streaming on Apple TV.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: surferfb
Stuwil said:
If it’s a minor point
As you claim then Apple would have complied with the order just like when any other government tells them to
However Apple as a company clearly doesn’t want payment links on apps as it will hurt
There IAP business model or else they would have already implemented it.
Click to expand...

Linkouts aren't a big win because they add significant friction to the purchase process that leads lots of users to not complete the purchase, whereas forcing Apple to allow third party app stores that were allowed to offer in-app-purchases would make buying things in app as easy as it is through Apple IAPs. Which is why a lot of us don't understand why Apple is fighting this so hard. It's was a really stupid own goal.

But, you and I clearly disagree on this. Please continue to feel free thinking this is a massive win for Tim Sweeney, even as Sweeney himself said the original ruling was a loss and unsuccessfully appealed to get it overturned.
 
  • Love
Reactions: I7guy
surferfb said:
Linkouts aren't a big win because they add significant friction to the purchase process that leads lots of users to not complete the purchase, whereas forcing Apple to allow third party app stores that were allowed to offer in-app-purchases would make buying things in app as easy as it is through Apple IAPs. Which is why a lot of us don't understand why Apple is fighting this so hard. It's was a really stupid own goal.

But, you and I clearly disagree on this. Please continue to feel free thinking this is a massive win for Tim Sweeney, even as Sweeney himself said the original ruling was a loss and unsuccessfully appealed to get it overturned.
Click to expand...
If there was no significant difference to the iOS App Store by including payment links
Then Apple would have already complied with it already
That is the reason why they are digging their heels in regarding it
Because it will hurt their App Store profit margin or else they would have done it already

The reason why it’s not unconstitutional
Is because these developers like epic are treated as individual companies on iOS
That is why the judge is telling Apple to comeback with a legitimate transaction fee
But Apple won’t come back with a figure they will try and get the payment link option removed by this appeal
Because if the fee is set very low it will eventually kill the IAP payment
Because companies at the start will deliberately show a cheaper price when going through the payment link then over time most will stop using IAP
That’s why they have not implemented before now.
 
  • Love
  • Sad
Reactions: I7guy and turbineseaplane
surferfb said:
Nope. Epic lost that point (and a bunch of others). Apple isn't a monopoly, Apple doesn't have to allow third party stores, Apple was within its rights to kick Apple off, Apple wasn't in violation of federal antitrust law, etc. The only point Apple lost was the one about link outs (and the judge said Apple was allowed to charge a commission on those link outs until Apple ignored her order) because of a California state law.

The court case was a massive win for Apple until Apple shot itself in the foot by being stupid about complying with the one relatively minor point they lost on.
Click to expand...
In the short term, I think Apple is just going to have to start charging app developers based on how many times their app is downloaded. It’s going to suck for those making free apps but they have to make money somehow


I think in the long-term it’s just going to be like a Windows PC where it’s a wild west of applications. If you want Facebook, you’ll have to go to the Facebook website and download the app. Then of course bad actors will take advantage of this.
 
How many years, how many hundreds of Epic articles, and still the same tired old headline image of the same three game characters.
 
russell_314 said:
I would bet a week salary that if epic games signed up for a developer account with their existing information Apple would just allow it. They’re not going to go out of their way to handhold them back on, but if they just applied for one, it’s not going to get rejected. There’s a difference between doing nothing versus actively trying to block someone.
Click to expand...
The system would recognize the DUNS number and inform the applicant that an account already exists. It wouldn’t even make it to submission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back
OSZAR »