Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple, ruling that Apple can't prohibit developers from linking to external purchase options in addition to IAP

A major win for Epic Games and Fortnite — Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers issued a permanent injunction in the Epic v. Apple case … Source: United States District Court .

The Verge 2021-09-11 Russell Brandom

Discussion

Vox Sara Morrison on x
Epic's win over Apple is actually an Apple victory
Gameranx Rachel Kaser on x
Fortnite Still Not Back on iOS as Apple vs Epic Legal Case Ends
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Apple's response to Judge's ruling in Epic Case: https://twitter.com/...
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
Today's ruling isn't a win for developers or for consumers. Epic is fighting for fair competition among in-app payment methods and app stores for a billion consumers. https://twitter.com/...
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
Fortnite will return to the iOS App Store when and where Epic can offer in-app payment in fair competition with Apple in-app payment, passing along the savings to consumers.
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Judge in Apple / Epic issues permanent injunction against Apple, developers now allowed to direct customers to other payment systems. Story coming! https://twitter.com/...
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on x
Fascinating on the consumer harm from Apple's control: “While some consumers may want the benefits Apple offers (e.g., one-stop shopping, centralization of and easy access to all purchases, increased security due to centralized billing), Apple actively denies them the choice.” ht…
@nickstatt Nick Statt on x
Here's Apple's statement: “Today the Court has affirmed what we've known all along: the App Store is not in violation of antitrust law. As the Court recognized ‘success is not illegal.’” https://twitter.com/...
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
Bam. In Epiv v Apple, judge rules Apple must allow apps to LINK OUT to external purchases, or lets them use buttons. That level of specificity matters! https://www.theverge.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@rjonesy Ryan Jones on x
We knew the App Store is really a Game Store, but... 98% of all IAP revenue comes from games. WOW https://twitter.com/...
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
Thanks to everyone who put so much time and effort into the battle over fair competition on digital platforms, and thanks especially to the court for managing a very complex case on a speedy timeline. We will fight on.
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
“Apple's slow innovation stems in part from its low investment in the App Store.” Just brutal https://twitter.com/...
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
On the eve of the iPhone 13 event, the Apple vs. Epic trial result is out. Judge rules Apple is not a monopolist, but issues an injunction that will force Apple to allow steering to outside payment methods. Apple made similar concession last week, but it didn't apply to games. ht…
@cat_zakrzewski Cat Zakrzewski on x
Overall this shows just how hard it is to define markets in antitrust cases involving Big Tech. The judge disagreed with both Apple and Epic's definition of the relevant market.
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
In a call with media, Apple General Counsel Kate Adams calls the Epic ruling a “resounding victory” that validates Apple's business model. She did not comment on the injunction that will force Apple to allow all apps to accept payments outside of Apple's 15% to 30% IAP system.
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Here's me on the most important question from the Epic / Apple injunction: what's the difference between a button and an external link? https://www.theverge.com/...
@dhh @dhh on x
Game over, IAP. @FortniteGame has set us all free. Thank you, @TimSweeneyEpic and @MarkRein 🙏❤️. This takes effect in 90 DAYS! https://twitter.com/...
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Important quote from the judge's ruling today: “Nothing other than legal action seems to motivate Apple to reconsider pricing and reduce rates.”
@stephennellis Stephen Nellis on x
Judge in Epic Games v Apple pointing out what many in tech know but don't like to talk about: A huge chunk of app revenue comes from users addicted to the dopamine hits that come from smashing the IAP button in games. https://twitter.com/...
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
TL;DR on the Epic v. Apple ruling: Apple can't stop developers from routing people outside the in-app purchasing ecosystem. But Epic has to pay Apple for breaking its rules. https://twitter.com/...
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
Here's the judge's full reasoning on why anti-steering provisions are bad. Short answer: “Apple created an innovative platform but it did not disclose its rules to the average consumer. Apple has used this lack of knowledge to exploit its position.” https://twitter.com/...
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
Of note, Epic's preliminary injunction (to keep the Epic dev account & ability to use Xcode, build, sign, and distribute Unreal Engine for Apple's platforms) is terminated. I'm not sure what happens here; if Apple is vindictive, Epic may be forced to drop support for iOS & macOS …
@bobbyallyn Bobby Allyn on x
I've never before seen a court decision where both sides claim victory yet both sides are (likely) appealing. Wow antitrust law is fun!
@rjonesy Ryan Jones on x
Please Apple, do the smart thing. I begged for 4 years. There's still time. I truly believe IAP is better for *everyone* - Apple, devs, users. But the rate got too high as “apps” became “the internet”. I *want* to use IAP! As a dev. As a user. Please drop the rate so I can 🙏
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
As I've said before, Stripe is the big winner here. Why give Apple 30% when you can give Stripe 3% instead? A lot of public companies from Match group to Roblox just got a whole lot more valuable overnight. https://www.theverge.com/...
@willoremus Will Oremus on x
Crucial nuance here: I've seen some folks saying Apple has been found to *not* be a monopolist in the Epic Games verdict. That's not quite right. The judge said Epic failed to *prove* Apple a monopolist—but she was careful to leave open the possibility that it is. https://twitter…
@rjonesy Ryan Jones on x
This is EXACTLY what I feared. EXACTLY. 🙈 Damn it Apple. Still reading, but off the bat, seems like: - Apple Pay + Stripe ~replaces IAP - tons of email spam with deals - difficult to unsubscribe - fraudulent billing - impossible refunds - unlimited sub terms, i.e. $9.99/day
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
Judge in Epic v. Apple concluded Apple wasn't a monopoly, but interesting side comment: “unlike ... the computer gaming market, nothing other than legal action seems to motivate Apple to reconsider pricing and reduce rates” for its app fees.
@samifathi_ Sami Fathi on x
As part of today's Epic v. Apple ruling, Epic Games will be required to pay Apple $12,167,719 as a result of damages for in-app purchases made outside the App Store system for Fortnite on iOS between August and October of 2020. https://twitter.com/...
@eringriffith Erin Griffith on x
Epic v Apple verdict: Judge Gonzalez Rogers rules in favor of Apple on all but one on one count: Apple can no longer ban app companies from telling their customers to pay elsewhere. https://twitter.com/...
@rjonesy Ryan Jones on x
Takes effect in 90 days. 🧨 December 9th. Apple just HAS TO drop their rate. Has to. I wonder what happens to the other settlement now. https://twitter.com/...
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Craig Federighi's arguments about Mac vs iOS security did not fly https://twitter.com/...
@eriqgardner Eriq Gardner on x
NYT: “A Win for App Developers” Ars Technica: “Major Win for Epic Games” BBC: “Apple Dealt Major Blow” Politico: “Apple Wins Epic Antitrust Suit.” (I went with “Mixed Ruling,” but largely agree with Politico this was a favorable development for Apple.)
@gerritd Gerrit De Vynck on x
Judge: even if you have the best product, hiding other options from your customers is anti-competitive. Seems significant for other Big Tech antitrust cases https://twitter.com/...
@alexstamos Alex Stamos on x
Agreed. I think this is a smart ruling. The judge understood the security benefits of the app store monopoly while also stopping that monopoly from being used to bilk consumers and independent developers. Apple should be fine with the profit margin on $799 phones. https://twitter…
@davidcicilline David Cicilline on x
Today's decision in the Epic Games v. Apple case is an important step, but it is further evidence that Congress must enact clear rules of the road to prevent platform monopolists from abusing their power and picking winners and losers online. Congress must act!
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
Apple just lost a huge part of the Epic vs Apple case, breaking open the App Store to alternate payment systems — Apple will almost certainly appeal the ruling, but with the pressure mounting globally over this very issue, I think the writing is on the wall
@sdw Sebastiaan de With on x
Today's ruling on Epic v. Apple is good for everyone involved. We probably won't use it for @halidecamera, but I applaud it. It does boggle my mind that Apple is conceding through lawsuits instead of changing App Store policy proactively to avoid anti-trust scrutiny. https://twit…
@panzer @panzer on x
This is really a big likely loss for consumer protections. Have fun chasing down all of the fraudulent scammy junk cash grabs that will result. Big win for game/IAP-focused publishers and for Stripe though. https://www.documentcloud.org/ ...
@deitaone @deitaone on x
EPIC GAMES PLANS TO APPEAL RULING IN APPLE CASE - EPIC GAMES SPOKESPERSON
@dhh @dhh on x
We will immediately start working on a build of @heyhey where users can sign-up and pay from the app. Proud to have played a small part in the events that lead to this. https://twitter.com/...
@senblumenthal Richard Blumenthal on x
Insufficient & disappointing. It is now up to Congress to take meaningful action. https://www.wsj.com/...
@willoremus Will Oremus on x
So how will the Apple/Epic ruling affect actual iPhone users, if enacted? @rachelerman helpfully covers the basics, including more ways to pay for stuff other than in-app purchasing, and potentially lower prices on some apps and services. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
@andrewrsorkin Andrew Ross Sorkin on x
Short Version of Judge in Epic-Apple ruling: Apple isn't a monopoly by any federal definition, but it engages in anticompetitive practices under California state law.
@waltmossberg Walt Mossberg on x
1/ I think the judge's ruling in the Epic vs Apple trial makes eminent sense. Like every retailer, @Apple has a right to a fee for distributing products. And the 30% was cheap when it was introduced. Apple has since cut it in various ways.
@bzamayo Benjamin Mayo on x
This seems pretty definitive on the matter https://twitter.com/...
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Apple stock closes down over 3% today on the Epic ruling, biggest one-day drop in about 4 months.
@amyklobuchar Amy Klobuchar on x
This ruling reaffirms what we know: app stores raise serious competition concerns. While the ruling addresses some of those issues, much more must be done. We need to pass federal legislation on app store conduct to protect consumers, promote competition, and foster innovation. h…
@rileytestut @rileytestut on x
If I went to court with Apple (no thanks) I would be ecstatic to receive any positive verdict...I honestly don't understand why Epic is appealing this decision? https://twitter.com/...
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
Apple won the vast, vast majority of issues Epic tried to bring up, but also I feel like all of those were long shots. But there is an actual win in all those losses (anti-steering), so I'm fascinating by Epic's rhetoric here. https://www.theverge.com/...
@rmantri Rajeev Mantri on x
Even Apple knows the App Store's commercial terms will change. They are simply drawing out the inevitable to maximize their upside - as they should try to do. https://twitter.com/...
@tanayj Tanay Jaipuria on x
Apple's App Store is likely doing ~$225B in total payment volume annually. Stripe right now after the Apple v Epic ruling: https://twitter.com/...
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Fascinating thing from the ruling: The Judge issued two requirements to Apple: 1) Allow developers to point users to outside payment methods*. 2) Allow developers to communicate directly with users. Apple already did both in the last 3 weeks (*Big caveat is reader vs. all apps).
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
I've been thinking about how much faster things are moving in the past few weeks on App Store policy. Wanted to prove my hunch was right so I ...had to make a complete timeline of the major policy changes Apple has made over the years. It's a lot! https://www.theverge.com/...
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
@reckless “And I'm confident Apple will try to say that “button” just means what something looks like, while developers will say that “button” means how something works. (There is a lot of irony in this for Apple.)”
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
Here's @reckless on the important sentence in today's ruling. There is a real “where does the comma go and does that change things like with the first amendment” vibe to all this! https://www.theverge.com/...
@fightfortheftr @fightfortheftr on x
“Where the rules apply equally to everyone,” you say Apple? What about the hundreds of apps that you are actively blocking on behalf of authoritarian governments? The App Store monopoly is a human rights disaster. Just let people run the software they want on their phones. https:…
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on x
Not sure I would read the judge's decision as a win for Apple, but sure. https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@bzamayo Benjamin Mayo on x
Not saying they would do this per se but the ruling doesn't stop Apple from saying ‘ok pay us a commission on all purchases made outside the app’ right? It's not written out afaict.
@repkenbuck Rep. Ken Buck on x
This is a small step in the right direction. However, how a judge could look at the evidence and rule that Apple is not a monopoly defies logic. Congress must pass my, @MattGaetz, @ByronDonalds, @LanceGooden and @RepCawthorn Big Tech antitrust bills. https://www.cnbc.com/...
@shannon_liao Shannon Liao on x
The court ultimately concluded that Apple isn't a monopolist under federal or state antitrust laws, even if the company *does* enjoy a market share of over 55% and “extraordinarily high profit margins.” The judge writes “success is not illegal.”
@shannon_liao Shannon Liao on x
Epic v. Apple verdict is out today, the judge ruled that Epic must pay Apple over $4 million at least and that Apple must allow developers to provide alternative payment methods. She wrote a nearly 200 page order explaining why, and here are some highlights. Thread 1/?
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
Another way of looking at this whole fight that is valid and paints both Apple and Epic in a bad light: This is really about who gets to make a ton of money off just a few whales. The house always wins, and both Apple and Epic are arguing over who gets to be the landlord. https:/…
@chockenberry Craig Hockenberry on x
Apple is competing against Stripe now. In my mind, that's a good thing because Stripe is really fucking great. If Apple can match their pricing & functionality, they'll get my business both as a developer and a consumer because I know where they stand on privacy.
@film_girl Christina Warren on x
Just cut the App Store fees to 15% and so much of this goes away. Not all of it, but so much of it. For devs that aren't the scale of an Adobe or Epic or whatever, 15% is worth doing the payments/fraud/tax stuff and hosting and serving your app.
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
Well, here's something Apple is going to be excited to cite in the coming months: the judge does not think a case has been made that iMessage is a form of lock-in. https://twitter.com/...
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on x
Hire the judge to write a tech newsletter: “Apple created an innovative platform but it did not disclose its rules to the average consumer. Apple has used this lack of knowledge to exploit its position.”
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
For Apple, today and this weekend was supposed to be all about pre-iPhone 13 and Apple Watch Series 7 hype and speculation. Instead, its grip on the App Store loosens with the judge forcing Apple to allow all app and games to steer users to outside payment methods.
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Apple's anti-steering rules are “an incipient violation of antitrust law” regardless of Epic failing to prove its case, says judge. https://t.co/O0Wh05jMxE
@mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on x
Apple needed to tear down the wall proactively and win by competing. And the wild is, they easily could have! (And now will.) In-App/Apple Pay is a great product and has inherent advantages thanks to the iPhone. Just a dumb misread and self-own.
@benthompson Ben Thompson on x
Epic lost on everything else, and has to pay Apple 30% of the money it earned from its own in-app purchase flow. And Apple can still kick them out of the store. Truly a self-sacrifice for developers generally 🤷‍♂️
@panzer @panzer on x
I get that apple is ‘the biggest’ and therefore the easiest one to dunk on here but at the same time dunking on apple because they got owned doesn't erase the EXTREMELY clear negative impact on consumers.
@jannwolfe Jan Wolfe on x
A major antitrust case, Epic Games v. Apple, ends in a split decision. The “Fortnite” creator failed to show Apple is an illegal monopolist. BUT the judge said Apple policies “hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice.” https://www.reuters.com/…
@jessicalessin Jessica Lessin on x
This is very good for Apple. The company strains to show it enforces App Store rules equally. The judge wasn't particularly concerned that they do. https://twitter.com/...
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Judge not terribly impressed with how Epic started this fight with Apple https://twitter.com/...
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Judge not impressed with analogies between the (digital) app store and (physical) retail stores at all https://twitter.com/...
@russellholly Russell Holly on x
The replies to this are overwhelmingly comprised of Fortnite players who do not care about this fight and just want to be able to play the game on their phones again. https://twitter.com/...
@patrickmcgee_ Patrick McGee on x
It's about relevant market: Epic says Apple does not compete with anyone; Apple says the market is for all digital video games. “The Court disagrees with both parties' definition of the relevant market.” (love this judge) 2/
@joshavant Josh Avant on x
There's now two key things that will really signal Apple's tone and intention: - How will Apple handle Epic's dev account for use in South Korea? - How will Apple handle Epic's dev account for maintaining Unreal Engine on iOS and macOS?
@patrickmcgee_ Patrick McGee on x
Judge finds Apple *is* engaging in anticompetitive conduct under California's competition laws. When coupled with Apple's incipient antitrust violations, these anti-steering provisions are anticompetitive and a *nationwide remedy* to eliminate those provisions is warranted."
@levynews Ari Levy on x
Apple is getting crushed on today's ruling. It's now only worth $2,483,000,000,000
@malcolmmoore @malcolmmoore on x
Interesting that Apple does not say it will appeal.... and where's the “We look forward to welcoming Fortnite back to the App Store”? https://twitter.com/...
@dbreunig Drew Breunig on x
Apple is the most successful accidental, reluctant gaming company. For at least the first 5 years of the iPhone, gaming was seen as a distraction not worth supporting by the voices that mattered at Apple. And yet... https://twitter.com/...
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
Three guesses why Apple had to invent the idea of ‘Reader Apps’ https://twitter.com/...
@benbajarin Ben Bajarin on x
This is a key nugget IMO when understanding how skirting IAP could hurt consumers. Games are far and away the largest app store revenue category. They are also the ones most likely to take advantage of consumers which shady monetization tactics. https://twitter.com/...
@verge @verge on x
Epic v. Apple judge rules Fortnite's Peely can appear naked in court https://www.theverge.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@jcenters Josh Centers on x
Tim Cook's biggest mistake has been his refusal to see inevitable blowback against its policies and self-regulating accordingly. Instead, Apple dug its heels in. https://twitter.com/...
@marcoarment Marco Arment on x
The more you tighten your grip, the more will slip through your fingers.
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on x
Ah, so Apple is trying to declare victory which, yeah it probably should not. https://twitter.com/...
@benthompson Ben Thompson on x
One final note: neither this ruling nor the JFTC settlement say that Apple can't require IAP. In fact this injunction specifically says developers can link out “in addition to” IAP. No mention about offering different prices.
@arctictony Tony Haile on x
This is epic. Next up: allow browsers to use engines other than Safari Webkit on iOS please! https://twitter.com/...
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
A smart PM at Stripe should start writing a proposal for the user facing subscriptions management experience which is the one advantage Apple Pay has over Stripe as an IAP solution on iOS. Basically this page for every iOS app I pay that uses Stripe for subscriptions. https://twi…
@laurengoode Lauren Goode on x
It is possible that Apple can both a) design a brilliantly seamless experience for buying software or buying things within apps and b) intentionally make it so “seamless” that consumers are unable to (or unaware of) experience other, better options outside of the walled garden.
@rjonesy Ryan Jones on x
Holy shit. Every single app is going to replace IAP with Apple Pay + Stripe. Holy shit. Games will have direct CC access for your kids to buy gems with way less confirmation than IAP. Yikes https://twitter.com/...
@gartenberg Michael Gartenberg on x
What happens when you leave the reality distortion field st home before deposition https://twitter.com/...
@rsgnl Joe Rossignol on x
Important to remember this is a U.S. trial and so I believe this would apply to U.S. developers only. Apple will almost certainly appeal, too. https://twitter.com/...
@alexstamos Alex Stamos on x
Personally, I would love the ability to click through warnings and sideload an alternative app store, but I think we also have to be cognizant of what that would mean for the overall ecosystem. Now we need a judge to force Apple to rewrite iMessage in a memory-safe language.
@mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on x
This from just over a year ago, would seem to hold up. Apple didn't realize they were fighting the wrong battle... Epic, seemingly, did. https://500ish.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on x
Scathing! “Nor can Apple hide behind its self-created web of interlocking rules, regulations, and generic intellectual property claims; or the lack of transparency among various businesses to feign innocence.” https://twitter.com/...
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
The judge had a clearer understanding of the dynamics of the App Store and it's impact to consumers than 99% of the journalists and newsletters that cover tech. https://twitter.com/...
@stephentotilo Stephen Totilo on x
Judge seems alarmed at the extent to which impulse spending by “exorbitantly high spending gamers” drives App Store revenue. Says it's outside the scope of antitrust but says issue is “worthy of attention”
@neiltwitz Neil Shah on x
Apple wins in 9/10 counts in the Apple-Epic trial. Big Win! Key pts: ✔Apple is not a monopoly: “ Success is not illegal” ✔The real issue (market) I'm contest here is “digital mobile gaming transactions” ✔Apple showed anticompetitive behavior: “antisteering, limiting choice” https…
@tomgara Tom Gara on x
“While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal” https://storage.courtlistener.com/ ...
@kellen_browning Kellen Browning on x
Interesting that after all the back-and-forth during the Apple-Epic trial over how to define the relevant market, the judge disagreed with both companies and found her own definition: digital mobile gaming, a $100 billion market. https://twitter.com/...
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
Finally Apple can no longer block Netflix & Audible from in-app sign-up & payment, and every other little app that has been squashed out of existence in the App Store because it can't afford to give 30% to Apple has a reprieve
@willoremus Will Oremus on x
Some antitrust experts I've spoken with argue we need to move away from market definitions and market share as the fulcrum of US antitrust law—and focus more on market power, behavior, and other ways of measuring competition. https://twitter.com/...
@pkafka Peter Kafka on x
When Apple says it is focusing on “services” what it really means is “getting a small percent of our users to pay for magical eggs and other power-ups in free-to-play games”. https://twitter.com/...
@eringriffith Erin Griffith on x
The judge's injunction on Apple's anti-steering rules could have a major impact on Apple's $20bn App Store revenue. The majority of that $$ comes from gaming. (Apple's recent loosening of those rules did not include gaming.) https://www.nytimes.com/...
@benbajarin Ben Bajarin on x
One theory I had for a while was Apple was going to lower their commission once the advertising revenue began to offset any potential losses. Again, Apple makes their $15-17b in annual app store commissions in two weeks of an average month of iPhone sales....
@tapbot_paul Paul Haddad on x
Wait so who won?
@reneritchie Rene Ritchie on x
Ideal for me would be a both Apple IAP and a web link. That way I can choose secure transactions, and to manage and cancel my subs via App Store, but also conveniently tap to get my books, comics, etc. via in-app web view transactions from the digital goods service provider. http…
@ballmatthew Matthew Ball on x
Apple sure dodged a bullet by allowing apps the right to email users two weeks ago, and then, a week later, announcing that non-gaming apps could tell users of alternative payment methods from inside their application
@willoremus Will Oremus on x
@ReedAlbergotti As in the Facebook antitrust case, the question of how to define the market is pivotal to the Apple/Epic ruling. Epic argued the relevant market was Apple's App Store. Apple argued it was the entire digital gaming industry. Judge settled on “digital mobile gaming …
@imgoldenyt Golden on x
Epic will have to pay Apple over $12 million for breaching the contract...#BringFortniteMobileBack https://twitter.com/...
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on x
Mystery solved: The judge says, yeah, operating profit margins for the App Store are probably over 70%. This should not be surprising, though Apple did a lot of hand waving to cast doubt on the matter. https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
I'm imagining: - A Substack app that lets you buy new subscriptions in a web view - Twitter Super Follows where the creator gets to keep 30 percent of revenue that would have otherwise gone to Apple - A total recalibration of the mobile gaming market??
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on x
If this survives what I assume will be Apple's legal challenges, I genuinely wonder if this will be good for both app makers AND Apple. Lots of people will, I suspect, still choose to pay inside the app with Apple's payment system. https://twitter.com/...
@caro_milanesi Carolina Milanesi on x
This Apple's statement is why I actually think Apple sees today as a win. Not violating the anti-trust law is a much bigger deal than being told to support alternative payment methods which I would guess Apple was expectiving to have to do at some point. https://twitter.com/...
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
For context, Apple and Epic can (and probably will) appeal the parts of the ruling they don't like. Apple will probably ask for the in-app purchasing rule changes to be delayed while the case moves up the court system.
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
Update on Epic/Apple: Apple issued a statement focusing on the conclusion that it's not a monopoly. It hasn't addressed whether it's going to appeal the injunction. https://twitter.com/...
@willoremus Will Oremus on x
Good summary of the two-pronged verdict here from @ReedAlbergotti: https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Including a brief glimpse at the road ahead, because this is definitely not over. https://twitter.com/...
@jacknicas Jack Nicas on x
The judge's order takes effect in 90 days. Apple almost certainly will try to block it.
@caro_milanesi Carolina Milanesi on x
One questions on the back of #EpicvsApple decision is how many game devs will continue to use Apple cause they cannot build their own payment infrastructure or pay someone else for it and get less in return
@nickstatt Nick Statt on x
Apple seems likely to appeal. Although Epic largely lost, the anti-steering is what keeps $$$ flowing to the App Store. Here's some new data it appears was unsealed with this order: gaming accounted for 76% of ALL App Store revenue in 2017. In 2016, it was 81% of billings.
@mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on x
This was always inevitable. Maybe not here, but eventually. Apple sorta tried to get ahead of it with Japan settlement, but didn't go far enough. This emboldens lawmakers and engenders continue bad will with developer ecosystem.
@msquinn Megan Quinn on x
If Stripe doesn't have a “how to set up a payments landing page for your app” marketing campaign going by noon I will be disappointed @collision @patrickc.
@panzer @panzer on x
Imagine a world where Apple had introduced a Stripe partnership a year ago and offered two clear options for developers, web via Stripe or streamlined IAP inside apps.
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
The judgments in the Epic v Apple trial: Apple has to allow external payments for all apps, not just ‘reader apps’; Epic has to pay Apple 30% of the Fortnite revenue it earned from its non-IAP payments, and must agree that Apple's allowed to terminate its dev account if it wishes…
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
How much more valuable is Epic today than it was yesterday? How much more valuable is Stripe?
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Judge: “Apple has not adequately justified its 30% revenue cut.”
@panzer @panzer on x
It's fine to blame everyone involved for being greedy but let's not forget who really gets screwed in the end.
@cnbctechcheck TechCheck on x
EIC of @verge Nilay Patel @reckless joins the TC team on the breaking news that a judge has just ruled in Epic Games' favor in their case against Apple, calling Apple's conduct in enforcing anti-steering restrictions “anticompetitive.” https://twitter.com/...
@toadsanime Ryan Brown on x
In a landmark ruling, Epic has effectively won its court case against Apple. Apple will have to allow gaming apps an alternative payment options without taking a cut - they can no longer force in-app purchasing: https://www.cnbc.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@s8mb Sam Bowman on x
If your main objection was around security / trust within apps, this seems to maintain the sanctity of the App Store. But if, like me, you think it's good for Apple to make lots of profit as a reward for creating the iPhone, this is pretty bad. https://twitter.com/...
@willoremus Will Oremus on x
Good news for Apple: Judge rules it has not been shown a monopolist in the relevant market, which she defines as “digital mobile gaming transactions.” Bad news for Apple: Judge rules its ban on apps directing users to pay outside the App Store is illegal. https://s3.documentcloud…
@rjonesy Ryan Jones on x
Stripe will launch “App Subscriptions” within 3 months ~one click 5% of revenue Tie credit card and email to analytics unlimited price tiers and terms and deals and offers My god. The implications. The fraud in kid's games... lord have mercy.
@leah_nylen @leah_nylen on x
“Apple contractually enforces silence, in the form of anti-steering provisions, and gains a competitive advantage. Moreover, it hides information for consumer choice which is not easily remedied with money damages.”
@mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on x
Apple has yet again failed to read the room. In this case, the courtroom.
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
There will be appeals and delays and whatnot, but right now this feels like the moment everybody recognizes the inevitable: anti-steering rules in app stores are dead. Hey Google, how's your trial prep going for your Epic case?
@leah_nylen @leah_nylen on x
That's a $100 billion market, she says, and Apple controls about a 55% share. “While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal.”
@eringriffith Erin Griffith on x
The heart of Epic vs Apple was defining the market. Epic said it was iPhones. Apple said it was gaming devices. Judge YGR defined it as “digital mobile gaming transactions.” Harsh words for Epic. https://twitter.com/...
@leah_nylen @leah_nylen on x
YGR rejects both how Apple and Epic framed the case, saying the relevant market is “digital mobile gaming transactions” not gaming transactions generally or Apple's ecosystem.
@benbajarin Ben Bajarin on x
This is why, as I have argued, Apple needs to make IAP the no-brainer system to use because of how much friction it eliminates for conversion. Hence, Apple should just lower their commision. I don't believe their commission was ever about $, it was about preserving ease of use.
@benbajarin Ben Bajarin on x
Most consumers will still use IAP. Only a handful of apps or brands can successfully, at scale, get normal consumers to use an alternate payment system. The issue, I see, is the impact to the user experience when developers start hassling you to use their own payments. https://tw…
@eringriffith Erin Griffith on x
From the Epic v Apple Verdict: “The Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. ... Success is not illegal. ... Epic Games failed in its burden to demonstrate Apple is an illegal monopolist.”
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
“Apple's conduct in enforcing anti-steering restrictions is anticompetitive. ... This measured remedy will increase competition, increase transparency, increase consumer choice and information while preserving Apple's iOS ecosystem which has procompetitive justifications.” https:…
@mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on x
How many Apple press releases are we going to get tonight changing the App Store rules on the fly? https://twitter.com/...
@benthompson Ben Thompson on x
Wow! Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers (Epic v Apple judge) just killed Apple's anti-steering provision! https://www.documentcloud.org/ ...
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
The full ruling here is 185 pages long, so I'm going to be working through the background reasoning for a little while.
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
Like Apple's attempt to retaliate against all Unreal Engine customers, their refusal to restore Epic's Fortnite developer account is vindicative and nonsensical. We're fighting Apple over their iOS terms, but this ban blocks Fortnite from Mac too. Nobody's arguing about Mac. http…
@leahcim_nyc @leahcim_nyc on x
Holy shit fortnite won https://twitter.com/...
@kantrowitz Alex Kantrowitz on x
Banner day for Twitter Superfollows https://twitter.com/...
@thebradsmith Brad Smith on x
👉🏾 Ruling: $AAPL can't prohibit devs from directing customers to purchasing mechanisms in their apps, external links in addition to In-App Purchasing, plus can't communicate with customers via points of contact obtained from customers through account registration within the app. …
@willsmith Will Smith on x
If you are in tech and have bad news to drop, today's gonna be a good day for that. https://twitter.com/...
@danielhipskind_ Daniel Hipskind on x
Judge rules in favor of @EpicGames and says that developers can now direct customers to use outside payment systems. #Apple #Fortnite #EpicGames https://twitter.com/...
@justinhendrix Justin Hendrix on x
Apple must allow other forms of in-app purchases, rules judge in Epic vs Apple https://www.theverge.com/...
@benedictevans Benedict Evans on x
The judge in the epic case has mirrored Apple's settlement in Japan last week - developers can link out to payment and talk to users. But not offering alt payment in app, yet (?) Devil in the detail. https://www.theverge.com/...
@mrmedina Alex Medina on x
epic changed the game. this is massive. https://twitter.com/...
@mattophobia Matt Collins on x
This is good news, but also the bare minimum Apple could do. At least devs can now tell people that they can get a subscription cheaper directly. https://twitter.com/...
@maxkriegervg @maxkriegervg on x
entire app store payment model just got upended 👀 https://twitter.com/...
@daniel_rubino Daniel Rubino on x
Huge news in that Epic vs Apple battle. Shocked (but happy) it went in favor of Epic. Now do Google. https://www.theverge.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@alexeheath Alex Heath on x
This is also going to be VERY good for Stripe
@viticci Federico Viticci on x
Narrator: “Yeah, it kinda didn't indeed.” https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@scobleizer Scoble on x
Seems like a big loss for Apple but what comes in 2022 makes this irrelevant. TV is the metaverse. Every show will be an App Store. ApplePay will be accepted everywhere. Everyone will use it because it is so easy. And you have no choice. https://twitter.com/...
@kantrowitz Alex Kantrowitz on x
Huge. A bunch of services you use on your iPhone are about to get cheaper. https://twitter.com/...
@nickstatt Nick Statt on x
To clarify, this isn't allowing alternative payments in app. The judge concluded Apple can control that aspect of the iOS platform because it is not a monopolist in her eyes. But now devs can link to a website that includes a cheaper option, or just one circumventing the 30% cut.
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
Apple should immediately reinstate Epic's developer account and Fortnite on the App Store, no question. They have no grounds
@digiphile Alex Howard on x
! “@Apple is permanently restrained...from prohibiting developers from including in their apps and their metadata buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to In-App Purchasing & communicating with customers” htt…
@eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
The judge in the Epic v Apple case has issued a permanent injunction: Apple cannot prohibit external links to non-App Store payment methods within apps or prohibit communications with users via contact information gleaned within the app (1/X) https://www.theverge.com/...
@eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
2/ These are mostly consistent with other App Store policy changes that have been forced upon Apple (or to which Apple has committed under pressure), as I detail in this post from Monday https://mobiledevmemo.com/...
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
This also means that Epic was completely justified in the stunt they pulled, adding alternate payments to Fortnite, as Apple's rules on this, & enforcement thereof, are *illegal*. Epic might not be getting sideloading & alt. App Stores out of this case, but still a huge win
@alexeheath Alex Heath on x
massive, massive blow to Apple's App Store biz https://twitter.com/...
@starfire2258 Sean Hollister on x
Huge. The court just blew up Apple's controversial app steering rule https://twitter.com/...
@dangillmor Dan Gillmor on x
The Apple Tax on app-store developers just took a huge hit from a federal judge who heard beyond-compelling evidence of the company's abuse of its iOS monopoly power. https://www.theverge.com/...
@jonporty Jon.Porter on x
Whelp, that's a MAJOR blow to Apple's App Store business model after judge rules developers can't be prevented from linking out to avoid Apple's 30 percent cut https://twitter.com/...
@kellymakena Makena Kelly on x
outside payments are a go! https://twitter.com/...
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
Game-changer: judge says developers can now direct customers to use outside payment systems https://twitter.com/...
@leah_nylen @leah_nylen on x
EPIC decision is OUT! Apple is not a monopolist, YGR finds, but it's anti-steering provisions are illegal.
@ezraklein Ezra Klein on x
The Apple decision seems very good for anyone who uses Apple products. An example of courts making it harder for a company to mistreat its own customers.
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Agree. Epic is positioning this as a loss - but it is actually mostly a win for many developers. Ironic they are calling it a loss when they entered the trial saying they were doing this for the developer community, not for themselves. https://twitter.com/...
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Quite frankly, whole strategy is a total head scratcher. Epic PR should be positioning this as a win for themselves because they got a judge to make the biggest business model change to the App Store in its history. Instead of they are calling it a loss. https://twitter.com/...
@stephenwarwick9 Stephen Warwick on x
To sum up Epic games has won after being defeated in court, and Apple will be forced to make massive sweeping yet very minor changes that will change absolutely everything and yet nothing for developers and will cost the company it's huge App Store cash cow that is actually tiny
@rebeccaslatkin Rebecca on x
I might not know much but after spending nearly a year working on a team of 50+ to get an e-commerce giant PCI compliant (including a terrifying audit&interrogation/a very bumpy Black Friday), I would cling to the App Store Payment System instead of taking that on internally.
@tha_rami Rami Ismail on x
I think the legal system is broken in a million ways, but you have to admit that listening to two game corporations arguing about the definition of “game” and the judge deciding that “you're both full of shit” feels like a pretty just outcome. https://www.theverge.com/...
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
New story: Apple is being forced to make the most significant change ever to the App Store, but it will only cost them a few billion dollars annually, or about 1% of revenue. This is a loss for Epic, but a win for Apple and many developers. https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@rebeccaslatkin Rebecca on x
And if these tweets don't change your mind, now would be the time to start walking on nails and LEGO barefoot. That will prepare you for working with credit card iFrames.
@rebeccaslatkin Rebecca on x
Last thing: I was part of the team that interviewed several PCI 3rd party providers who bid on our account. You can do all the due diligence in the world (we did) but there are incompetent wolves in sheep's clothing with fake uptime stats every where you look.
@paulg Paul Graham on x
“Together, the legal setbacks and the tighter regulatory controls indicate that Apple's long run of calling all the shots on the App Store — one of the linchpins of the internet economy — may be ending.” https://www.nytimes.com/...
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Question is: did Apple's decisions over the past few weeks... steer (sorry) the Judge's ruling? Or did Apple determine those were the two most likely decisions from the Judge and make a calculated bet to preempt her? I'd bet on the latter.
@snazzyq Quinn Nelson on x
Apple: “Waaaaaaaa” Epic: “Waaaaaaaa”
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
My GUESS is that Fortnite returns to the App Store sometime early next year — better for Apple, Epic, and consumers. Epic could build a website for buying V-Bucks on the web and implement a button in Fortnite and comply with other App Store rules that led to its removal.
@thegoblinnn Goblin on x
this is fucking huge news, apps can now start accepting crypto as payment and still be listed on the app store - lets gooo https://twitter.com/...
@tha_rami Rami Ismail on x
Potential soon news: Unreal Engine announces fully integrated mobile payment solution with a 12% cut for iOS projects only. Literally just one click to enable it - extremely user-friendly. I mean, I could see them do it.
@benedictevans Benedict Evans on x
Reminder - App Store commission was about $15 billion last year (6% of Apple revenue) and 80 to 90% games. The interesting question is whether Apple's rules have stopped things other than games from working. Has Apple gerrymandered the store?
@jeiting Jacob Eiting on x
kk, I think a weirdly placed comma has everyone in a tizzy remove the “and their metadata buttons,” and the interpretation is purely about linking out, no outside payments in the app have on some authority that this is Apple's understanding too https://twitter.com/...
@gruber John Gruber on x
This is my interpretation as well, having spoken to Apple reps. https://twitter.com/...
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
@gruber @reckless What Apple thinks the injunction means ...doesn't matter. It's the court's guideline now. Maybe the judge is fine with requiring the button to open Safari, or is okay with popping an in app browser, or thinks it should allow a fully native in-app flow.
@gruber John Gruber on x
@reckless No, that's not at all what they're saying on background. They're saying the ruling is unambiguous that Apple is allowed to mandate that (lowercase) in-app purchases must use Apple's (uppercase) In-App Purchase processing. Pages 149-150 of the ruling.
@backlon Dieter Bohn on x
@gruber that seems like a misreading to me. It is a list of things that apple can't prohibit in “apps and their metadata,” and that list includes “buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms”
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Bipartisan consensus that the Epic / Apple ruling is not enough. Similar statement from Klobuchar today as well https://twitter.com/...
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
@gruber I just said this to my actually-practicing lawyer wife and she giggled
@cgartenberg Chaim Gartenberg on x
As always, the most important question in tech comes down to “what is a button?” https://twitter.com/...
@snazzyq Quinn Nelson on x
@gruber @reckless I remember from most of my law classes that grammar is never the strong suit of opinions written by the court. I don't know how this could possibly be interpreted as “metadata buttons.”
@bzamayo Benjamin Mayo on x
What's a button and what's a link ... What are we debating, court legalese or iOS 7 design principles?
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
@gruber There's no way they can have that conference without Epic in the room! This isn't going to just be easy for them. And both sides are going to appeal every aspect of this ruling. The uncertainty here is going to last for a long time.
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
@gruber Apple is saying it's “metadata buttons” on background when it's a lift from 3.1.1 which makes it abundantly clear???? That is rich https://twitter.com/...
@tomwarren Tom Warren on x
this is a smart read on the ruling, and most importantly it's the judge that decides here, not Apple https://twitter.com/...
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
@gruber “Apple is permanently restrained and enjoined from prohibiting developers from including buttons in their apps that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms in addition to In-App Purchasing.” Lots of devs are going to test this, and Apple can be taken back to court over …
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
Judge YGR came off as razor-sharp during the proceedings, which I watched far too much of. And much of Apple's time was spent trying to deceive & mislead her. Amused that her pinpoint targeted judgment is potentially the most damaging to Apple, delivered days before new iPhone
@robotodd Todd Haselton on x
“The court isn't stupid — it specified buttons and external links, which means they are presumed to be distinct. So a button can't just be an external link that kicks you to Safari.” - good read by ⁦@reckless⁩ https://www.theverge.com/...
@matthewstoller Matt Stoller on x
This is the key takeaway from the Epic-Apple ruling. You shouldn't need to show market power. https://twitter.com/...
@gruber John Gruber on x
@reckless My guess is that soon, well within the 90 days, Apple will confer with YGR re: updated App Store Guidelines to make sure they comply with the injunction. Our collective uncertainty today will dissipate before any developers have the chance to test it.
@stroughtonsmith Steve Troughton-Smith on x
Very important clarification needed, but seeing that the ruling is based on wording in Apple's own agreement makes it much clearer: it covers apps & metadata, it allows buttons, external links, or any other form of call to action https://twitter.com/...
@jsnell Jason Snell on x
The larger point here is that the judge, not Apple, decides how her ruling is interpreted and enforced https://twitter.com/...
@pkafka Peter Kafka on x
@backlon @reckless I think the court means button and links *are* the same thing - things that take you out of the app. If YGR wanted to tell devs/Apple that this could happen in the app she'd just write that in plaintext. So we'll see!
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Here is a very very important button that directs customers to a purchasing mechanism. Apple is no longer allowed to prohibit these buttons in apps. So... are the doors wide open? https://www.theverge.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@fortnitegame Fortnite on x
Epic has asked Apple to restore our Fortnite developer account. Epic intends to re-release Fortnite on iOS in Korea offering both Epic payment and Apple payment side-by-side in compliance with the new Korean law.
@markgurman Mark Gurman on x
Curious what Apple does here. Would imagine they wait till the ruling before touching Epic's developer account. https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@bobbyallyn Bobby Allyn on x
Epic spokeswoman confirms it is appealing the decision; Apple is “considering all legal options” in response. Nobody's happy!
@benthompson Ben Thompson on x
Good catch. Unreal Engine could be finished if Apple is feeling vindictive. https://t.co/331YbCkX1f
@rustybrick Barry Schwartz on x
So Apple must allow app developers to bypass Apple payment system but Apple doesn't have to allow apps that do that and Epic has to pay damages for doing so? https://twitter.com/...
@jonyiveparody @jonyiveparody on x
Difficult to to direct users to your outside payment system if your app isn't in the App Store. 🤪 #Apple https://twitter.com/...

Chronicles

Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple, ruling that Apple can't prohibit developers from linking to external purchase options in addition to IAP

Related Coverage

Discussion