Dozens of US states back Epic's appeal of Apple case decision

[Daniel Sims]

In context: Epic Games this week filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, of the court’s decision from last year in its antitrust case against Apple. This time, it has the backing of dozens of US states.

Epic filed a 91-page appeal to the US Ninth Circuit court of appeals this month, against last year’s decision that Apple was within its right to kick Fortnite off the iOS App Store, and that Apple’s behavior on the App Store isn’t monopolistic. Attorneys general of 34 US states and the District of Columbia issued a statement this week in support of Epic.

States including Utah, Texas, Colorado, and Indiana assert that Apple monopolizes the distribution of software on iPhones and iPads, harming consumers. Epic’s own appeal elaborates on the possible advantages of allowing third-party app stores on iOS such as lower prices, more choices, and lower fees for developers.

The case started in 2020 when Epic started letting Fortnite players on iOS make purchases within the game without paying Apple a cut of the revenue. When Apple took Fortnite off the App store, Epic sued.

In September of 2021, a California court ruled mostly in favor of Apple, saying that iOS is not a market in itself but rather only a part of the larger digital sales market. Though, it also said Apple could no longer stop iOS developers from pointing customers in the direction of payment methods that don’t incur Apple’s fees. The court also said Apple might eventually become monopolistic. Epic was ordered to pay millions of dollars, and both companies appealed the decision soon after.

While Apple hasn’t allowed Fortnite back onto iOS as a native app, it did return earlier this month through GeForce Now.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/93178-dozens-us-states-back-epic-appeal-apple-case.html

 

[waclark]

"...the possible advantages of allowing third-party app stores on iOS such as lower prices, more choices, and lower fees for developers."

What makes anyone think developers or distributors will lower prices? And when 90% if the apps I use are free, I don't see how you can lower that price.

I also think that "more choices" is a bit of a red herring too. And if Apple is losing out on revenue for apps, I don't see how they will lower developer fees.

All of these things are "possible" but how likely are they? Personally I don't care either way. I'm fine buying apps through Apple or somewhere else if I have to.

 

[Dimitriid]

Those State Attorney Generals can support them all they want: Apple will still win. If anything needs to go to the SOTUS it will be the most pro big business and monopoly decision possible simply because of how it looks today.

In fact they probably feel pretty safe to use this as a campaign thing to say "Look we're trying to do the right thing here but the Supreme Court gets in the way!" Instead of actually trying to push the legislator and the DNC people blocking all DNC policies to collude with the GOP.

It's sadly all about appearances for them and then immediately giving up and doing *nothing* when there's the slightest of opposition, sometimes even inventing in-house "opposition" to ensure nothing ever changes in favor of the common folk.

 

[yRaz]

"...the possible advantages of allowing third-party app stores on iOS such as lower prices, more choices, and lower fees for developers."

What makes anyone think developers or distributors will lower prices? And when 90% if the apps I use are free, I don't see how you can lower that price.

I also think that "more choices" is a bit of a red herring too. And if Apple is losing out on revenue for apps, I don't see how they will lower developer fees.

All of these things are "possible" but how likely are they? Personally I don't care either way. I'm fine buying apps through Apple or somewhere else if I have to.

The point isn't whether prices will go down, it's whether you actually own the hardware you pay for. With phones costing more than what I paid for my first car I'd like to actually own it. I got my s21+ for free so I'm not going to ***** too much, but I'd like to be able to install whatever OS I want.

"Phones" are PCs, just because they look different doesn't mean they should be governed differently. If you bought a computer and someone told you that you could only run temple OS on it I'm sure you'd be pissed.

If you can't use your hardware as you please then you don't actually own it. Make whatever excuse you like, you don't own the $1000 space rectangle that you paid for

 

[dangh]

"...the possible advantages of allowing third-party app stores on iOS such as lower prices, more choices, and lower fees for developers."

What makes anyone think developers or distributors will lower prices? And when 90% if the apps I use are free, I don't see how you can lower that price.

I also think that "more choices" is a bit of a red herring too. And if Apple is losing out on revenue for apps, I don't see how they will lower developer fees.

All of these things are "possible" but how likely are they? Personally I don't care either way. I'm fine buying apps through Apple or somewhere else if I have to.

It's not about lowering prices by developers. Developers are customers of front end stores. There is no competition of those on apple at all, and very small one on Android. So I can't choose the best store for my product on ios, because there is only one store. Pure definition of monopoly.
In addition developers who competing with apple products have to... Give money to company owning competition. So given their product and product from Apple cost the same and have same number of users, apple makes 50pct more on it.
And there is number of apple actions to make developers subject to unreasonable demands, in order to keep app in store. Eg. app to access files on a paid cloud space was removed, because was free, and cloud space was not.
That is not competition or fair use.

 

[ZedRM]

Wow! Governments actually doing something good and right for the people? More of this please!

Microsoft? You're next..

 

[tancabean]

The point isn't whether prices will go down, it's whether you actually own the hardware you pay for. With phones costing more than what I paid for my first car I'd like to actually own it. I got my s21+ for free so I'm not going to ***** too much, but I'd like to be able to install whatever OS I want.

"Phones" are PCs, just because they look different doesn't mean they should be governed differently. If you bought a computer and someone told you that you could only run temple OS on it I'm sure you'd be pissed.

If you can't use your hardware as you please then you don't actually own it. Make whatever excuse you like, you don't own the $1000 space rectangle that you paid for

I can’t change the OS in my car either. Gadgets are a combination of hardware and software. Pretending otherwise will just lead to unnecessary angst.

 

[yRaz]

I can’t change the OS in my car either. Gadgets are a combination of hardware and software. Pretending otherwise will just lead to unnecessary angst.

You can change the OS in your car

 

[bviktor]

Yeah, these geniuses forgot the "more malware" part about these awesome alternate ways of installing apps.

We already had that experiment with Windows, and it was and is a catastrophe, but some people just never learn.

I like my iOS BECAUSE of the restrictions, not DESPITE OF them. If you don't, feel free to use other operating systems, namely Android. Why the hell do these people force their will on us?

F*ck Epic, and all these corrupt "backers".

 

[m4a4]

Yeah, these geniuses forgot the "more malware" part about these awesome alternate ways of installing apps.

We already had that experiment with Windows, and it was and is a catastrophe, but some people just never learn.

I like my iOS BECAUSE of the restrictions, not DESPITE OF them. If you don't, feel free to use other operating systems, namely Android. Why the hell do these people force their will on us?

F*ck Epic, and all these corrupt "backers".

The irony of defending forcing a closed OS on people, and all based on fearmongering. How dare people have choice with what they own! Lol

Also, that's considering you could still choose not to use alternates if Apple allowed it (but people currently can't choose otherwise).

It's always amusing seeing people defend a trillion dollar corporation babying it's customers as to what you can and can't do with what they own...

 

[Sausagemeat]

Epic are so out of line in all of this. I wonder what’s got into Sweeneys head. There is no metric that shows Apple have a monopoly. Users choose Apple and when they do they sign an agreement with Apple for the use of the operating system. If you dont agree you are free to return the device within 14 days and buy a product from a competitor (which has similar prices and policies to Apple for third party service providers).

Lawyers must see Epic games as an atm these days.

 

[Sausagemeat]

The irony of defending forcing a closed OS on people, and all based on fearmongering. How dare people have choice with what they own! Lol

Also, that's considering you could still choose not to use alternates if Apple allowed it (but people currently can't choose otherwise).

It's always amusing seeing people defend a trillion dollar corporation babying it's customers as to what you can and can't do with what they own...

That’s a lie. Nobody anywhere is “forced” to use Apple products.

 

[m4a4]

That’s a lie. Nobody anywhere is “forced” to use Apple products.

So they're not forced to use a closed OS on an Apple product?

Don't be disingenuous. The last line of my last comment applies here as well.

 

[Sausagemeat]

So they're not forced to use a closed OS on an Apple product?

Don't be disingenuous. The last line of my last comment applies here as well.

No they aren’t. There’s even legal precedence for that.

U.S. Declares iPhone Jailbreaking Legal, Over Apple’s Objections

Federal regulators lifted a cloud of uncertainty when they announced it was lawful to hack or “jailbreak” an iPhone, declaring Monday there was “no basis for copyright law to assist Apple in protecting its restrictive business model.” Jailbreaking is hacking the phone’s OS to allow consumers to...

www.wired.com

You are legally welcome to install whichever software you so choose to use on Apples hardware. Of course you void the warranty. But that’s no different to almost any other mobile phone from any manufacturer.

 

[m4a4]

No they aren’t. There’s even legal precedence for that.

U.S. Declares iPhone Jailbreaking Legal, Over Apple’s Objections

Federal regulators lifted a cloud of uncertainty when they announced it was lawful to hack or “jailbreak” an iPhone, declaring Monday there was “no basis for copyright law to assist Apple in protecting its restrictive business model.” Jailbreaking is hacking the phone’s OS to allow consumers to...

www.wired.com

You are legally welcome to install whichever software you so choose to use on Apples hardware. Of course you void the warranty. But that’s no different to almost any other mobile phone from any manufacturer.

First, Apple still forces their OS on their devices. Jailbreaking is because people try to get around it. Don't pretend that it has Apple's blessings.

And 2nd, you don't void the warranty by doing so (in the US). The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act covers that too.

Seriously, don't take Apple's word on these things. It's not in their best interest to be your friend lol

 

[bexwhitt]

No they aren’t. There’s even legal precedence for that.

U.S. Declares iPhone Jailbreaking Legal, Over Apple’s Objections

Federal regulators lifted a cloud of uncertainty when they announced it was lawful to hack or “jailbreak” an iPhone, declaring Monday there was “no basis for copyright law to assist Apple in protecting its restrictive business model.” Jailbreaking is hacking the phone’s OS to allow consumers to...

www.wired.com

You are legally welcome to install whichever software you so choose to use on Apples hardware. Of course you void the warranty. But that’s no different to almost any other mobile phone from any manufacturer.

You can install what you want on an Android phone with a few hoops to jump through. Not that I am advising that, as there is lots of dodgy stuff out there.

 

[Aceseven]

The point isn't whether prices will go down, it's whether you actually own the hardware you pay for. With phones costing more than what I paid for my first car I'd like to actually own it. I got my s21+ for free so I'm not going to ***** too much, but I'd like to be able to install whatever OS I want.

"Phones" are PCs, just because they look different doesn't mean they should be governed differently. If you bought a computer and someone told you that you could only run temple OS on it I'm sure you'd be pissed.

If you can't use your hardware as you please then you don't actually own it. Make whatever excuse you like, you don't own the $1000 space rectangle that you paid for

I've payed silly money to get my Fold3, and yes, I do own it, but I understand that samsung/google are who really keep it running.

I didnt just pay to acquire this phone, I also paid to use the android ecosystem, just as when in the past when I had an iphone, I bought it because I wanted the phone and the support of apples ecosystem, allowing everyone to just bolt on whatever to that isnt a good idea imo.

Unlike my PC, I cant just handbuild a phone and fix or troubleshoot any hardware/software issue it may have, a user really needs to have faith in the company backing it, and I dont want epic getting its paws deeply into one because they want more money.

the way I see it if epic wants to really do something then they should just create their own device, I wouldnt use it because theyre a scummy company(they all are to a certain degree, but especially epic).

 

[Sausagemeat]

You can install what you want on an Android phone with a few hoops to jump through. Not that I am advising that, as there is lots of dodgy stuff out there.

It’s pretty much the same on both. It’s not illegal to install anything you like on hardware you own.