Epic Games takes legal action against Apple and Google in UK
Original Story: Epic has expanded its ongoing legal battle against Apple and Google by filing new complaints in the UK.…
www.gamesindustry.biz
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Epic Games takes legal action against Apple and Google in UK
- Thread starter dex3108
- Start date
www.gamesindustry.biz
So they're going door-to-door to see who is willing to take their tenuous position seriously, are they?
You mean Ireland? The country which the EU stated "provides illegal state aid and tax benefits to Apple"?
Having Apple's European HQ there likely would make it harder to justify Ireland pushing against them.
Edit: Google has their European HQ there as well, likely for the same reasons. Something tells me the Irish wouldn't take kindly to rocking the boat like that.
Last edited:
Ireland isn't the only EU country right next to the UK. But even If they did Ireland they could just escalate it to an EU court or tribunal
Depends how literal you were being. A bit of an odd term to use if you were referring to France.
Get fucked, Epic.
It's specifically because of their dominant positions that your game got this big in the first place. They deserve their cut. If you're unhappy with that, create your own cellphone platform.
It's specifically because of their dominant positions that your game got this big in the first place. They deserve their cut. If you're unhappy with that, create your own cellphone platform.
While Epic are in the wrong on this one, the above is totally unreasonable.
Asking companies that don't like the Apple/Google duopoly to shut up and build their own platform is absurd. They have complete control over the mobile landscape and should be regulated as utilities to ensure they don't abuse their position.
Amazon forked android and made their own version and eco system so it's not that far fetched that epic could do the same.
The "fortnite phone/tablet" :p
Might even give them an edge if fortnite is only available on that system
How would regulating the storefronts themselves as utilities work? Genuine question.
Like sure, the Internet itself should be a public utility, but storefronts?
If you operate with an Android fork you have to source components and other services outside the Open Handset Alliance, which drastically diminishes your options and the viability of your product.
Amazon have no presence in the phone market, even with their resources the Fire Phone was a failure. They now only operate in the tablet and TV streaming areas. The phone OS market is clearly a closed shop going forward.
If the "storefronts" are required for people to live a normal life (online banking, online gov services and other essentials etc.) then the rules of those "storefronts" should be regulated to ensure a fair access and ensure healthy competition.
I think calling the App Store and Google Play "storefronts" misrepresents how essential they have become. They form the basis of how everyone interacts with modern mobile infrastructure and they serve as a marketplace for other companies to compete in.
I'm not saying that the way they operate now isn't reasonable, but I'd rather have regulation in place to ensure that it remains the case.
Storefronts with a 99.9% market share between two operators that abuse hardware signing keys to lock out competition?
Abso-fucking-loutely.
Visa and MasterCard are "just" payment mechanisms, but they're heavily regulated (and not even enough!) despite not having as much market power as Apple and Google.
You'd really struggle to convince any judge or lawmaker that access to a video game/video game store is an essential service in that way. If they were restricting access to online banking for example, then that's a very different matter, and regulation there is arguable, though I would imagine you'd still be able to access the bank's website even if they blocked the app for whatever reason.
I didn't ask if they should be regulated, I asked how. And again, payment mechanisms are far more of an essential service than a video game/video game store.
Hell, they don't even need to regulate the storefronts. They can bypass them entirely and just force the mobile OS' to allow free Sideloading and the ability to install other App Stores if the person so chose.
And in the case of Google make it so they can't prevent other Phone Manufacturers from preloading the installation of another store by default (and yes, Google had been caught doing this). Require the installation of the Play Store sure... But make it illegal to block the installation of other stores by default.
Then you don't need to regulate the stores because you have effectively added competition and the problem has been 100% solved.
Last edited:
It's okay to have your platform and take your cut. However, it's not okay not to allow users to install other stores, which is Apple does. Fuck Epic, their practices are terrible, but fuck Apple as well.
Found the actual filings here.
You are misrepresenting them as a videogame store.
Apple's app store in particular exercises monopoly control of mobile banking, media (including being a defacto media censor for everything on the device), news, payments, telephony, assembly, public discussion and essential real world safety apps, often to the extent that it literally costs people their lives.
Wow, so now if you think that Apple/Google shouldn't be able to abuse there market position, your a card carrying MAGA supporter, gotcha.
I was referring to Epic Games Store and Fortnite with the video game/video games store part.
Regulating Apple to require them to facilitate access to the essential services you mention would make sense, I certainly wouldn't argue against it. But requiring them to facilitate access to Fortnite or Epic Games Store? That's a much tougher argument to make from an 'essential services' POV.
I like this.... I also think there should be a way to delete the stores somehow with I guess an option to reinstall the Play store if you somehow find yourself without one at all. But basically if I decided I wanted to use some third party store, I should be able to delete Googles Play store from my phone or any Samsung stores or whatever.
Not really, competition law is simply the fastest way to make those essential things happen, and it doesn't really matter how.
Thats how it should be.
Everyone focuses on the Apple side of the whole thing because of not being able sideload. But everyone always ignores that Google is also being sued too. And for good reason. Google is legitamitely participating in monopolistic behaviourby telling their OEMs that if they so much as dare as preloading another store, they'll ban them from Google Mobile Services.
Epic had attempted to create their own Mobile App Store for Android, and even went to go negotiate with a couple OEMs to have it preloaded by default. They even came to an agreement with a couple OEMs. Though Google found out and before they signed the final contracts Google basically told them to drop it or they'll drop them and all of a sudden the OEMs quickly stopped negotiations and ghosted Epic.
You can say what you want about how "Apple shouldn't be forced to allow sideloading. Its always been a closed ecosystem". But nobody should be able to deny that Google is absolutely guilty as charged.
I disagree. The theory of Epic's case would force Apple to do business with anyone, to support offering their products on their own product, be it EGS, Parler or whatever. That's a fair argument to make for the essential services you mention, that Apple must do business with HSBC or whoever, and I do feel that in a lot of ways law has lagged behind recognising the essential role the internet plays in modern human interactions. (Access to the internet should be a human right honestly.) But forcing Apple to do business with someone, force them to offer a product on their own product, that should require a substantial justification and public interest, and I don't think access to Fortnite/EGS is of a particularly high public interest.
If you're going down the competition law route, then Epic's case argues that 'Apple is dominant in the iOS app distribution market, and the iOS in-app payment processing market.' Which, yes, Apple is indeed dominant in their own product. ResetERA is dominant in the 'ResetERA' market. Epic is dominant in the 'Epic Game Store' market. Companies control access to their own products, and get to set conditions of access! That argument is really tough to make honestly.
This is news to me. I'm guessing people aren't hounding his Twitter as much nowadays.
Why am I not surprised Tim Sweeney is in favor of this kind of thing?
Got thrown out:
9to5mac.com
www.catribunal.org.uk
UK judge rules against Epic in bid to sue Apple despite mixed Google decision - 9to5Mac
Epic’s legal battle with Apple has hit a roadblock in the UK. Despite a mixed ruling on Epic’s right to...
9to5mac.com
Judgment (Service out of the jurisdiction) | Competition Appeal Tribunal
www.catribunal.org.uk
Got thrown out:
UK judge rules against Epic in bid to sue Apple despite mixed Google decision - 9to5Mac
Epic’s legal battle with Apple has hit a roadblock in the UK. Despite a mixed ruling on Epic’s right to...Judgment (Service out of the jurisdiction) | Competition Appeal Tribunal
That North Dakota bill they lobbied for also got rejected too.
App store regulation reportedly backed by Epic Games fails in North Dakota
The bill didn't pass, but it would have provided app developers more freedom.
www.cnet.com
I mean, the court literally just said they should wait until the US action has finished and then refile it.
Lol this could be confusing since both heads of each company are named Tim haha.
Looks like they are staring to spiral, whatever leads to them going public quicker. They'll have some nicely priced stock for a few years.
Tim is going to be shaken to the core when that shit happens.
Tim is going to be shaken to the core when that shit happens.