Ahead of Epic Games’ upcoming hearing today, Apple submitted a 500-page document covering the fact-finding and conclusions of the law, which basically summarizes the information exchanged between Apple and Epic, presenting the relevant facts. To the judge and dispute the reasons Conclusions that should be drawn when applying the law to a case.
Apple has seized a number of controversial issues since the start of the dispute with the Epic Games App Store, which has remained unchanged in terms of its typical fee structure since its 2008 debut. Improve the policy, the development principle remains the same.
Apple sees Epic’s challenges as an attack on the App Store’s underlying business model in the past 13 years.Apple has confirmed that rigorous audit practices for apps provide consumers with security, privacy and reliability, which is what devices are. Its well known ones which lead to significant benefits for users and developers.
The 30 percent fee Apple charges is in line with fees charged by app markets and other software providers, as demonstrated in a study Apple conducted earlier this year, and Apple recently launched a small business program. Small to reduce the fee to 15 percent for developers. Earning under $ 1 million a year, Apple has entered a market that accepts 30 percent commissions – the rate was not set when the App Store was launched.
In response to claims that the App Store is against competition due to the lack of alternative app stores on the iPhone, Apple pointed to competition in the device and game transaction market. There are other platforms people can choose from, along with other gaming options, and web apps are supported on iPhone and iPad.It’s a gaming alternative that Microsoft and Google have already taken advantage of, with Apple taking its name. Epic Fortnite’s main story to address the issue.
Epic’s flagship game, Fortnite, represents the competitive landscape. “Cross-platform” and cross-platform transactions. The same consumer can purchase V-Bucks in the app, on her iPhone (via browser), during lunch breaks and on home consoles in the evening, Apple (unlike some of its competitors) allows playing. “Multiple wallets” to be able to purchase in-game items called Fortnite V-Bucks on one device and use on another. In other words, iOS users can purchase V-Bucks on PC and then (before Fortnite removed) used in Fortnite on iPhone or iPad, with Epic receiving no commission, even a penny, to Apple.
An internal Epic document related to “Project Liberty” points out that Epic has been planning against Apple and Google since 2008. Epic started Project Liberty when it found a decrease in users and average monthly revenue, devising a strategy to pay for it. Less commission while still The advantages of App Store benefits and the money Apple has invested in the ecosystem.
As part of a plan to sue Apple, Epic Games hired an attorney and a public relations firm with hundreds of thousands of dollars in final payments.Epic has outlined a plan to get Fortnite approved with an alternative payment option. It is hidden which hotfix is already enabled which has led to a current dispute. An Epic internal document describes the legal battle with Apple and Google as “fun!” And ponder how Apple and Google consider the new fee, where Epic Games looks like a “bad guy”.
All of this is part of a pre-planned media strategy called “Project Liberty.” Epic retains Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP and PR firm in 2019, and the lawsuit is the culmination of that effort. Epic tried to show that Apple was a bad guy so it could regain interest in Fortnite, however, when Epic got its start on the iOS platform, it told players that they could continue to play on consoles, PCs, and other devices. This implies the existence of competition and the absence of monopoly.
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney confirmed Project Liberty in an earlier interview and said Epic had spent months preparing the lawsuit against Apple, although Apple’s court filing provides new insights into the timing of the lawsuit. Epic takes action to bind Apple and Google in antitrust lawsuits.
Apple argues that the antitrust legal expansion has not been endorsed, and that Epic’s product market description is inaccurate because of the other platforms the App Store competes with. Apple claims that Epic exaggerates the profitability of Apple. The App Store and the argument that the verification process is ineffective is inaccurate.Last year, Apple rejected 150,000 apps, and malware on iOS devices is hardly unheard of compared to many malicious apps. Found on PCs and Android devices
Apple said Epic’s claim that the market is merely an iOS app will fail, and the mitigation that Epic seeks to harm consumers and developers as it weakens the App Store. Apple also sees the App Store as a feature that Integration of iPhone and in-app purchases, a combined feature of App Store, that does not allow third-party payment options, which is what Epic aims.
At the bottom, Epic asks this court to enforce the alternative terms at Apple so that Epic can make more money, but Epic’s request will endanger other developers and consumers in addition to imposing their never-before-seen obligations. Apple’s prior to opening proprietary systems and engineering to third parties.
The Epic v. Apple Throne Trial will begin on May 3 and will end on the week of May 24. Both Epic and Apple will summon famous witnesses, including Apple CEO Tim Cook, Apple Fellow Phil Schiller, chief of staff. Apple engineering Craig Federighi and former iOS software chief Scott Forstall, who will testify on behalf of Apple.