[UPDATE] Epic Games to sue Apple and Google

Deleted member 514389 · Aug 15, 2020

Another reason to add to the already epic-ly long list of reasons as to why I strongly dislike this game/EG.

"Bu huu, we want back into your app store, if you won't let us, we'll cry to mommy big court."

Seriously ? Get on with life.

Their store, their decision. Seems as if Epic is just as mature as the average FN Player...

chaoskagami · Aug 15, 2020

antitrust lawsuit

That's not how it works, Lil' Timmy Sweety. Android doesn't do vendor lock-down - anyone can install whatever the hell they want. Google provides integration to the Play Store only if you obey the TOS - you can still sell your shit independently and make people download a third party app store or something. There is no antitrust issue on Android. F-Droid and Humble Bundle say hi.

They could win against Apple I suppose (though precedent says otherwise, it's been tried before, but the fact that apple is a minority compared to Android means it's not in fact an antitrust issue and allowing third-party distribution would open up a whole can of jailbreak-flavored worms here.) They're definitely not going to win against Google here on antitrust, though.

VartioArtel · Aug 15, 2020

chaoskagami said:
That's not how it works, Lil' Timmy Sweety. Android doesn't do vendor lock-down - anyone can install whatever the hell they want. Google provides integration to the Play Store only if you obey the TOS - you can still sell your shit independently and make people download a third party app store or something. There is no antitrust issue on Android. F-Droid and Humble Bundle say hi.

They could win against Apple I suppose (though precedent says otherwise, it's been tried before, but the fact that apple is a minority compared to Android means it's not in fact an antitrust issue and allowing third-party distribution would open up a whole can of jailbreak-flavored worms here.) They're definitely not going to win against Google here on antitrust, though.

Exactly. While Apple may have some scummy parts, the whole entire case Epic's building here is sadly not one of them.

There is no monopoly, and people keep scrambling to say they are, but keep failing to prove what Apple is doing here is a Monopoly.

Since my earlier post did some most investigating. Gaming Consoles also run a 30% commission rate.

https://bit.ly/2DTKO5y
https://bit.ly/3apKFT8

The misunderstanding might come from 2nd party companies (IE: Ubisoft) and their unique patchers for PC. Admittably, the only proof we got of Sony or Switch come from people who seem to work in the market and can speculate, the actual #s are under an NDA which is liability for a lawsuit if confirmed.

The fact still remains, the industry standard on both levels that we know of is 30%. There's no proof to the otherwise for major platforms. And yet there's people 'conveniently' forgetting that 0 to defend papa Epic.

Aftershock · Aug 15, 2020

Be interesting to see how this one turns out. Big lose revenue for Epic every day its not on the stores

J-Machine · Aug 15, 2020

Dimensional said:
Please read every discussion I had on this thread. I clearly stated that there other phones, and my analogy was meant to be taken as a hypothetical, not a literal. Please avoid picking a single statement out of a massive amount of text to then take out of context. It doesn't help anyone's arguments, only makes everyone hate one another more.

I'm not gonna read 8 pages of content when you are directing your argument to 1 point I made and as such I will respond to it. It's not on me in an argument to bring forth the arguments of the person I'm discussing a topic with. that is not how debates work. also you should use the word hypothetical when making such analogies otherwise people will take you out of context because in English you should make your message clear and concise in order to ensure no errors in readability can occur.

That aside we don't need hypotheticals in a discussion about real life scenarios that are actually occurring in real time for a long time. Epic walked Google AND Apple into a lawsuit it custom tailored on purpose because they wanted more money. They excluded the console stores no doubt because that is where they make the most products for. There is more to loose in challenging your dominant business partners, especially when you are publicly traded after all. Tim is a cry baby crying for more entitlement to suckle on. He has alternatives like getting people to side load apks. the phone market doesn't need him, he wants that market and he wants it to play by his rules much like any brat at recess only to make a huge scene when he doesn't get his way.

VartioArtel · Aug 15, 2020

J-Machine said:
I'm not gonna read 8 pages of content when you are directing your argument to 1 point I made and as such I will respond to it. It's not on me in an argument to bring forth the arguments of the person I'm discussing a topic with.

You are attempting to enter a debate, with the entire conversation available off the dime.

The people involved in a debate are not obligated to repeat their arguments for every individual who waltzes in. You are choosing to willfully ignore multiple pages of points, counterpoints, evidence, and counterevidence, why, because you're lazy? That's not how a debate is held jimmy. Nobody is obligated to repeat a point to you that's already been answered. Instead by choosing to attack a point that already has been answered, you come off as a pretentious gaslighter who ignores evidence in order to push a narrative.

Is that what you're aiming to do? Maybe not. But it is how you come off. Do I come off as a jerkass? Yes. And that's my intent, to be blunt as hell and honest and upfront. Because I ain't gonna spoil you and treat you like you're special. You'll get the same criticism and the same reference to read the 8 pages of content I'd give anyone else.

Maybe I'm misreading you as well. In that case, whoops, but all I read here is "I ain't going to bring forth an argument that's already been made against me because it isn't convenient for me".

J-Machine · Aug 15, 2020

VartioArtel said:
You are attempting to enter a debate, with the entire conversation available off the dime.

The people involved in a debate are not obligated to repeat their arguments for every individual who waltzes in. You are choosing to willfully ignore multiple pages of points, counterpoints, evidence, and counterevidence, why, because you're lazy? That's not how a debate is held jimmy. Nobody is obligated to repeat a point to you that's already been answered. Instead by choosing to attack a point that already has been answered, you come off as a pretentious gaslighter who ignores evidence in order to push a narrative.

Is that what you're aiming to do? Maybe not. But it is how you come off. Do I come off as a jerkass? Yes. And that's my intent, to be blunt as hell and honest and upfront. Because I ain't gonna spoil you and treat you like you're special. You'll get the same criticism and the same reference to read the 8 pages of content I'd give anyone else.

Maybe I'm misreading you as well. In that case, whoops, but all I read here is "I ain't going to bring forth an argument that's already been made against me because it isn't convenient for me".

Oh heck no I never entered a debate. I saw a topic of discussion and replied with my opinion. You replied. Even then I really don't care what you said before because yes you are acting like a jerk and why would I want to put effort into that? the onus is on the person presenting not the person being argued to. I learned that in law class so I don't feel it's up for debate.you can take that as you will but i'm not continuing if this is your attitude and if you don't care about your points enough to bring them back up.

VartioArtel · Aug 15, 2020

J-Machine said:
Oh heck no I never entered a debate. I saw a topic of discussion and replied with my opinion. You replied. Even then I really don't care what you said before because yes you are acting like a jerk and why would I want to put effort into that? the onus is on the person presenting not the person being argued to. I learned that in law class so I don't feel it's up for debate.you can take that as you will but i'm not continuing if this is your attitude and if you don't care about your points enough to bring them back up.

So 3 things:

A:

I saw a topic of discussion and replied with my opinion. You replied.

https://gbatemp.net/threads/update-epic-games-to-sue-apple-and-google.571853/page-6#post-9167497

You posted your opinion here, I never replied to that. It was Dimensional who replied to you.

B:

Even then I really don't care what you said before because yes you are acting like a jerk and why would I want to put effort into that?

Welcome to reality. Nobody has patience for someone who enters a Debate, whether of their own instigation or not, and ignores all evidence they readily have available. People are jerks with you because you don't bother reading anything - whether the previous conversations or the person you're talking to is name, much less avatar.

C:

I learned that in law class

If this was a court of law, and you were a member of the prosecution or defense, joining partway through the case due to complications or because of you needing to defend your client who's on the bench? Then you sure as hell better have read up the court record to ensure you understand exactly where in the case you stand unless you are full out intent on screwing over your own case and possibly getting thrown out of the court.

Also, this is not a law class, and if you were my lawyer I'd ask for you off my team asap because you couldn't be bothered to read relevant documents/text before walking into the court.

Once you chose to debate with Dimensional, you forfeited any excuse to willful ignorance of prior discussions as one of the sacred rules of debate is to refer to prior debate material to use as ammunition to point out contradictions, whether in your own logic or your opponent's, to either attack the enemy with, or to pivot your own logic to avoid a losing case.

Bladexdsl · Aug 15, 2020

i didn't think it was possible for me to hate anymore more than apple. but epic have done it they have taken the number one spot as the most despicable company on earth! your 2nd place now apple

Dimensional · Aug 15, 2020

Bladexdsl said:
i didn't think it was possible for me to hate anymore more than apple. but epic have done it they have taken the number one spot as the most despicable company on earth! your 2nd place now apple

I'm sorry to say but Epic still have to take that crown from EA before they can be considered the most despicable company on earth, and we all know EA will never surrender that crown.

VartioArtel · Aug 15, 2020

Bladexdsl said:
i didn't think it was possible for me to hate anymore more than apple. but epic have done it they have taken the number one spot as the most despicable company on earth! your 2nd place now apple

For me it's a 6-way tie between Bethesda, EA, Tencent, Activision-Blizzard, Apple, and Epic (technically repeating myself since Epic is a Tencent company). Google's not that much lower, but it's not on my ban list, yet.

Dimensional · Aug 15, 2020

VartioArtel said:
For me it's a 6-way tie between Bethesda, EA, Tencent, Activision-Blizzard, Apple, and Epic (technically repeating myself since Epic is a Tencent company). Google's not that much lower, but it's not on my ban list, yet.

I wonder what the official polls will say. I remember EA was voted worst in the world 2 years in a row, and this was during one of the more recent economic depressions. Would be worth investigating again.

mituzora · Aug 15, 2020

Just gonna say; Epic at least on Google's front, does not have to go through their store to publish apps. They can easily publish apps on their own, make their own Android based store, etc. There are other options. They don't have to publish on Google Play. They violated Google's ToS (it says something about games being required to go through Play's payment system) and Google dropped them for breaking an agreed-upon ToS. Doesn't stop them for self-publishing though.

That being said, look at how Microsoft almost became broken into multiple companies over a web browser that they too, were refusing to let OEMs publish on preloaded windows machines. It can honestly go either way. You could easily pay for Netscape/download it, but IE was integrated by default, and MS barred OEMs from installing Windows if they chose to preload Netscape.

So it could easily go either way. Personally though, because of the ToS and the high availability of other alternative app stores, it wouldn't surprise me if Google won the lawsuit

VartioArtel · Aug 15, 2020

mituzora said:
Just gonna say; Epic at least on Google's front, does not have to go through their store to publish apps. They can easily publish apps on their own, make their own Android based store, etc. There are other options. They don't have to publish on Google Play. They violated Google's ToS (it says something about games being required to go through Play's payment system) and Google dropped them for breaking an agreed-upon ToS. Doesn't stop them for self-publishing though.

That being said, look at how Microsoft almost became broken into multiple companies over a web browser that they too, were refusing to let OEMs publish on preloaded windows machines. It can honestly go either way. You could easily pay for Netscape/download it, but IE was integrated by default, and MS barred OEMs from installing Windows if they chose to preload Netscape.

So it could easily go either way. Personally though, because of the ToS and the high availability of other alternative app stores, it wouldn't surprise me if Google won the lawsuit

I've covered this earlier, but this is a matter of 'platform'.

This would be like telling Nintendo, Xbox, or PlayStation, that they need to permit 2nd/3rd party stores on their consoles. At most, they permit 2nd/3rd party sellers (IE: EA/SQEX stores, Gamestop) to provide codes as an intermediary for competition.

One can argue, Apple requiring all the companies to run through them as a security measure. They can confirm the Apps are scam/virus free, they can ensure that the money transfers are safe, etc. Also by opening to other company stores, they can load cookies or the sort that could risk the security of their customers. There's so many problems that can happen.

And if I was Apple, that would probably be the core front I'd go through. This is different from a browser ban by the OEMs. That's preventing competition to push their own product (browser). There can, and probably is, a valid argument to be held over hosting a first-party only store for customer security. (Note: I am unfamiliar with Apple store and if it supports 2nd party/3rd party stores like I listed above, if it does that only reinforces their case).

mituzora · Aug 15, 2020

VartioArtel said:
I've covered this earlier, but this is a matter of 'platform'.

This would be like telling Nintendo, Xbox, or PlayStation, that they need to permit 2nd/3rd party stores on their consoles. At most, they permit 2nd/3rd party sellers (IE: EA/SQEX stores, Gamestop) to provide codes as an intermediary for competition.

One can argue, Apple requiring all the companies to run through them as a security measure. They can confirm the Apps are scam/virus free, they can ensure that the money transfers are safe, etc. Also by opening to other company stores, they can load cookies or the sort that could risk the security of their customers. There's so many problems that can happen.

And if I was Apple, that would probably be the core front I'd go through. This is different from a browser ban by the OEMs. That's preventing competition to push their own product (browser). There can, and probably is, a valid argument to be held over hosting a first-party only store for customer security. (Note: I am unfamiliar with Apple store and if it supports 2nd party/3rd party stores like I listed above, if it does that only reinforces their case).

yeah, I agree for the most part. I do think that using the case of microsoft vs netscape can very well be used in terms of this lawsuit, but I agree that Apple can (and likely will) get away with using the security argument. I mean, we're talking about the company who is actively fighting the right-to-repair bill.

Biggest difference is that Microsoft was controlling the control chain, wheras Apple is doing this on it's own devices, in it's own infastructure, all within their terms of service. I think that will be their saving grace here. It would be like someone trying to sue me for not allowing them to eat outside food in my storefront. it's my storefront, I get to control what I can and can't sell, and if I don't want you to eat someone else's food in my store, I'm well within my legal right to do so.

tl:dr, I'm in agreeance that there's a very strong point that Apple can and will get away with this.

VartioArtel · Aug 15, 2020

mituzora said:
yeah, I agree for the most part. I do think that using the case of microsoft vs netscape can very well be used in terms of this lawsuit, but I agree that Apple can (and likely will) get away with using the security argument. I mean, we're talking about the company who is actively fighting the right-to-repair bill.

Biggest difference is that Microsoft was controlling the control chain, wheras Apple is doing this on it's own devices, in it's own infastructure, all within their terms of service. I think that will be their saving grace here. It would be like someone trying to sue me for not allowing them to eat outside food in my storefront. it's my storefront, I get to control what I can and can't sell, and if I don't want you to eat someone else's food in my store, I'm well within my legal right to do so.

tl:dr, I'm in agreeance that there's a very strong point that Apple can and will get away with this.

This is a different viewpoint, and I agree with that interpretation. There's plenty here saying Apple *will* win this, it's not a matter of If but When. It's just down to if Apple has the testicles to keep it running.

If they do, I fully expect a massive countersuit.

1 for maliciously breaking contract and all the fees that would occur (presuming the ToS counts as a contract)
1 for defamation by calling them fascists in a public manner (1984tnite will be their undoing I swear).
And 1 for all the lost funds they would owe Apple (and Google, presuming they do the same) for estimated losses from Transactions through the store they'd have lost for the entirety of the case. While Apple was the one who removed Fortnite from the store, it was due to the breach of ToS.

A ToS for the most part can be considered a legally binding contract. And I'm all but certain there's some clauses in there for what apple will do for a breach of ToS.

If Google and Apple wants, there's absolutely no way they can't sue Epic into the dirt for this. And I would consider it hilarious because they're currently lacking 2 Cash Flows from Fortnite to support them. For every month that the game's off the Google and iPhone Stores, they will be losing funds as it is. Then they'll have to pay Apple/Google to compensate for those funds as though they upheld the contract to compensate Apple/Google for the lost of funds they should have had if they hadn't broken contract (with this being more likely to be enforced considering the blatant malicious intent thanks to 1984tnite).

While Google's bill per month will be lower because of sideloading apps, I fully expect both stores to rip Epic a new one combined. While I don't like Google or Apple winning, I got a clear favorite simply cause they don't act a 1/5th as arrogant publically as Epic just did.

Deleted member 397813 · Aug 15, 2020

apple and google are now dealing with ubisoft and epic this is kinda sad but not really

mituzora · Aug 15, 2020

VartioArtel said:
This is a different viewpoint, and I agree with that interpretation. There's plenty here saying Apple *will* win this, it's not a matter of If but When. It's just down to if Apple has the testicles to keep it running.

If they do, I fully expect a massive countersuit.

1 for maliciously breaking contract and all the fees that would occur (presuming the ToS counts as a contract)
1 for defamation by calling them fascists in a public manner (1984tnite will be their undoing I swear).
And 1 for all the lost funds they would owe Apple (and Google, presuming they do the same) for estimated losses from Transactions through the store they'd have lost for the entirety of the case. While Apple was the one who removed Fortnite from the store, it was due to the breach of ToS.

A ToS for the most part can be considered a legally binding contract. And I'm all but certain there's some clauses in there for what apple will do for a breach of ToS.

If Google and Apple wants, there's absolutely no way they can't sue Epic into the dirt for this. And I would consider it hilarious because they're currently lacking 2 Cash Flows from Fortnite to support them. For every month that the game's off the Google and iPhone Stores, they will be losing funds as it is. Then they'll have to pay Apple/Google to compensate for those funds as though they upheld the contract to compensate Apple/Google for the lost of funds they should have had if they hadn't broken contract (with this being more likely to be enforced considering the blatant malicious intent thanks to 1984tnite).

While Google's bill per month will be lower because of sideloading apps, I fully expect both stores to rip Epic a new one combined. While I don't like Google or Apple winning, I got a clear favorite simply cause they don't act a 1/5th as arrogant publically as Epic just did.

I didn't even think about the recourse of Apple/Google trying to get their money back from fradulent sales from breaking their agreed-upon ToS. that's a really good point!.

I grazed on at least Google's ToS in the first post. It clearly defines that any in-game purchases MUST go through GMS and not through some third-party application(I think non-game apps actually have less restrictions on this) I don't use Apple personally, so I don't know much about their ToS. I do know they will actively fight and likely win this lawsuit though. As I brought up their massive lobbying against the right-to-repair bill, and if its anything like that they will actively fight to keep all money coming into their pocket (that bill is very much worth researching and the massive amounts of money companies like CompTIA and Apple have been putting into lobbying against it).

I will note that this is also from the point of view from an American consumer, and not something from the EU that has much more reguations on anti-competition. Apple/Google actually might lose that, if this was a lawsuit in the EU

VartioArtel · Aug 16, 2020

mituzora said:
I didn't even think about the recourse of Apple/Google trying to get their money back from fradulent sales from breaking their agreed-upon ToS. that's a really good point!.

I grazed on at least Google's ToS in the first post. It clearly defines that any in-game purchases MUST go through GMS and not through some third-party application(I think non-game apps actually have less restrictions on this) I don't use Apple personally, so I don't know much about their ToS. I do know they will actively fight and likely win this lawsuit though. As I brought up their massive lobbying against the right-to-repair bill, and if its anything like that they will actively fight to keep all money coming into their pocket (that bill is very much worth researching and the massive amounts of money companies like CompTIA and Apple have been putting into lobbying against it).

I will note that this is also from the point of view from an American consumer, and not something from the EU that has much more reguations on anti-competition. Apple/Google actually might lose that, if this was a lawsuit in the EU

True, EU might be more in their favor, but both companies are American, will likely sue each other's American officers, in american courts. While the EU can do sanctions, it probably won't change this is an American contract under American contract law.

J-Machine · Aug 16, 2020

VartioArtel said:
So 3 things:

A:

https://gbatemp.net/threads/update-epic-games-to-sue-apple-and-google.571853/page-6#post-9167497

You posted your opinion here, I never replied to that. It was Dimensional who replied to you.

B:

Welcome to reality. Nobody has patience for someone who enters a Debate, whether of their own instigation or not, and ignores all evidence they readily have available. People are jerks with you because you don't bother reading anything - whether the previous conversations or the person you're talking to is name, much less avatar.

C:

If this was a court of law, and you were a member of the prosecution or defense, joining partway through the case due to complications or because of you needing to defend your client who's on the bench? Then you sure as hell better have read up the court record to ensure you understand exactly where in the case you stand unless you are full out intent on screwing over your own case and possibly getting thrown out of the court.

Also, this is not a law class, and if you were my lawyer I'd ask for you off my team asap because you couldn't be bothered to read relevant documents/text before walking into the court.

Once you chose to debate with Dimensional, you forfeited any excuse to willful ignorance of prior discussions as one of the sacred rules of debate is to refer to prior debate material to use as ammunition to point out contradictions, whether in your own logic or your opponent's, to either attack the enemy with, or to pivot your own logic to avoid a losing case.

ya im not buying that. i responded cause my bell had a notification. you just want to instigate for whatever reason. have a nice day

GBA Connoisseur

G̷̘̫̍̈́̊̓̈l̴̙͔̞͠i̵̳͊ţ̸̙͇͒̓c̵̬̪̯̥̳͒͌̚h̵̹̭͛̒̊̽̚

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Self proclaimed Pog champion

Well-Known Member

Self proclaimed Pog champion

Well-Known Member

fanboys triggered 9k+

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Global Dingus

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Self proclaimed Pog champion

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum