Login to comment
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.— Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) September 10, 2021
Epic spokeswoman confirms it is appealing the decision; Apple is "considering all legal options" in response. Nobody's happy!— Bobby Allyn (@BobbyAllyn) September 10, 2021
this is an amazing op-ed. @Moonalice argues why Apple needs to "Think Different." Apple is in a position to support Congress and consumers. They need to dump their associations with the surveillance capitalists and fix the app store. Win Win for consumers. https://t.co/0gqkQW3icI pic.twitter.com/QT83K2eQ3I— Jason Kint (@jason_kint) September 10, 2021
“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.”— nilay patel (@reckless) September 11, 2021
Lots of devs are going to test this, and Apple can be taken back to court over it.
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.— Rebecca (Slatkin) Sloane (@RebeccaSlatkin) September 10, 2021
The App Store changes ordered by a judge yesterday as part of the Epic-Apple verdict won’t cut into Apple’s profits much.— Kellen Browning (@Kellen_Browning) September 11, 2021
But it could be a huge win for app developers, who stand to make a boatload more $$$ by dodging App Store fees.
With @jacknicas: https://t.co/yZmWPHOEtO
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.— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) September 10, 2021
Please Apple, do the smart thing. I begged for 4 years. There’s still time.— Ryan Jones (@rjonesy) September 10, 2021
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 🙏
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://t.co/aRVXdmTvJL— Rami Ismail (رامي) (@tha_rami) September 10, 2021
Prominent tech investor (and critic) makes persuasive case that Apple should take the L on App Store fees, anti-steering rules, and self-preferencing of its apps--in service of a greater W on the privacy, security, and trust that are core to its brand. https://t.co/XqLrjwwx4j— Will Oremus (@WillOremus) September 10, 2021
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!— David Cicilline (@davidcicilline) September 10, 2021
Zach Shakked’s iPhone app has earned $5 million over the past year.— Jack Nicas (@jacknicas) September 11, 2021
Apple took nearly $1.5 million of that — its fee for letting him run his app on its devices.
Now he’s hoping Friday’s court ruling will get him to keep much more of that money. https://t.co/W4pv8Ud0x6
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.— Andrew Ross Sorkin (@andrewrsorkin) September 10, 2021
Its a dumb rule Apple doesnt even need. Not having to enter cc info and being able to manage all my subscriptions in one place and cancel with a swipe is amazing. Its always best just to win on offering the best product instead of anti competitive rules. https://t.co/8rlfHup5Wr— Adam Kirk (@atomkirk) September 11, 2021
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. https://t.co/wJGGZ59sYl— Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) September 10, 2021
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.”— Quinn Nelson (@SnazzyQ) September 10, 2021
Agreed.— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) September 10, 2021
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://t.co/Kw6G6LPWUR
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— Steve Troughton-Smith (@stroughtonsmith) September 10, 2021
I just said this to my actually-practicing lawyer wife and she giggled— nilay patel (@reckless) September 11, 2021
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.— nilay patel (@reckless) September 11, 2021
Apple: “Waaaaaaaa”— Quinn Nelson (@SnazzyQ) September 10, 2021
Here’s the judge’s full reasoning on why anti-steering provisions are bad.— Adi Robertson (@thedextriarchy) September 10, 2021
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." pic.twitter.com/AhR2TQMq2x
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://t.co/SHGkeEANph— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) September 10, 2021
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. pic.twitter.com/ArNvV6Owed— Will Oremus (@WillOremus) September 10, 2021
"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.)”— Dieter Bohn (@backlon) September 10, 2021
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.— Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) September 10, 2021
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://t.co/N1Rxq78GUY— Steve Troughton-Smith (@stroughtonsmith) September 10, 2021
#epicvsapple ruling is a step ahead for consumer right, but not a full victory. @Apple must allow developers to send their users to other payment systems, but it doesn’t have to let app makers use their own in-app payment systems. Full text here https://t.co/5hJf3aWWNq pic.twitter.com/oZPwcnib3n— Marco Scialdone (@marcoscialdone) September 12, 2021
If developers design similar UI to @EpicGames @FortniteGame that showcases how the user saves in the game, of course consumers will use alternative payment methods. By doing so, that forces Apple to compete and get their prices down. https://t.co/sTu5icNHdQ— Mohamed Mansour (@mohamedmansour) September 11, 2021
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.— Ben Bajarin (@BenBajarin) September 10, 2021
The issue, I see, is the impact to the user experience when developers start hassling you to use their own payments. https://t.co/OC7pIPTeMd
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.— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) September 10, 2021
Today’s ruling on Epic v. Apple is good for everyone involved. We probably won’t use it for @halidecamera, but I applaud it.— Sebastiaan de With (@sdw) September 10, 2021
It does boggle my mind that Apple is conceding through lawsuits instead of changing App Store policy proactively to avoid anti-trust scrutiny. https://t.co/yHE5hlx9jT
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. pic.twitter.com/mYWAcYNbhV— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) September 10, 2021
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"— Dieter Bohn (@backlon) September 10, 2021
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.— Peter Kafka (@pkafka) September 10, 2021
So we’ll see!
I love this from @mgsiegler. It underscores what I’ve been arguing for the last couple of years: if Apple would just make sensible changes, so much of the regulatory scrutiny would go away, so much goodwill would be restored and so little would be lost https://t.co/jmYGGumxDd— Christina Warren (@film_girl) September 12, 2021
NYT: "A Win for App Developers"— Eriq Gardner (@eriqgardner) September 10, 2021
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.)
.@Apple would be smart to negotiate with regulators. Side loading is coming in EU, and maybe US, unless Apple cuts a deal. Side loading would kill Apple crown jewels of privacy, security. Apple can make economic, policy concessions to avoid side loading. https://t.co/FoxPJc4pgM— Roger McNamee (@Moonalice) September 10, 2021
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— Stephen Warwick (@StephenWarwick9) September 10, 2021
Everything you need to know – or at least I what I thought was interesting – in <100 tweets about the Apple/Epic lawsuit verdict today.— Scott Kupor (@skupor) September 10, 2021
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://t.co/4oNBEGBbx5— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) September 10, 2021
The silly thing is to trust my credit card with a link outside AppStore, met a lot of users who said they will never do that so Apple wins. AppStore refund policy is one of the best trusting a link outside the store would be useless. https://t.co/fHmXei4xgG— 🇬🇭Jerry Sarpong (@jerryluti) September 11, 2021
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.— Rebecca (Slatkin) Sloane (@RebeccaSlatkin) September 10, 2021
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.— Rami Ismail (رامي) (@tha_rami) September 10, 2021
I mean, I could see them do it.
Bad day for @Apple. They won things on technicalities, but lost trust of judge and lost on the key issue. Antitrust law will apply better to other app segments. New normal: when you do indefensible in plain sight, you will be regulated. My @TIME op-ed: https://t.co/FoxPJc4pgM— Roger McNamee (@Moonalice) September 10, 2021
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.”— Patrick McGee (@PatrickMcGee_) September 10, 2021
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.— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) September 10, 2021
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.— Rebecca (Slatkin) Sloane (@RebeccaSlatkin) September 10, 2021
NYT is missing two major things:— Adam Holisky 💙 #ABetterABK (@AdamHolisky) September 11, 2021
1. Users will do whatever is easiest. Basic UX Product Management. This is definitely solvable.
2. It's going to take significant time to ramp up alternative payment methods that work at scale of Apple's payment processors. https://t.co/6zANHbtHU7
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?— Benedict Evans (@benedictevans) September 10, 2021
What’s a button and what’s a link ... What are we debating, court legalese or iOS 7 design principles?— Benjamin Mayo (@bzamayo) September 10, 2021
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.— Adi Robertson (@thedextriarchy) September 10, 2021
Good analysis by @WillOremus. Apple is at least a little worse off after the Epic verdict. The judge almost begs another plaintiff to bring a new case. And the use of California law, if upheld on appeal, opens a new seam for antitrust plaintiffs to take on big tech. That’s huge. https://t.co/q2GHzPDchJ— Reed Albergotti (@ReedAlbergotti) September 12, 2021
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.— Steve Troughton-Smith (@stroughtonsmith) September 10, 2021
I’m not sure what happens here; if Apple is vindictive, Epic may be forced to drop support for iOS & macOS pic.twitter.com/jK6lwks2sk
Excellent report by @WillOremus. Epic case has one clear negative for @Apple — it limits AppStore lock in — and lays ground for future cases in CA against Apple and others. Tolerance of monopoly is disappearing, with profound implications for Big Tech. Feds are watching, too. https://t.co/7R2fY8nL3W— Roger McNamee (@Moonalice) September 12, 2021
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.— John Gruber (@gruber) September 11, 2021
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.— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) September 10, 2021
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.— John Gruber (@gruber) September 10, 2021
Pages 149-150 of the ruling.
kk, I think a weirdly placed comma has everyone in a tizzy— Jacob Eiting (@jeiting) September 10, 2021
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 pic.twitter.com/n9wcpXhh3C
Important quote from the judge's ruling today: "Nothing other than legal action seems to motivate Apple to reconsider pricing and reduce rates."— nilay patel (@reckless) September 10, 2021
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://t.co/SQgXxc4ekt— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) September 10, 2021
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.— Dieter Bohn (@backlon) September 10, 2021
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.— Cat Zakrzewski (@Cat_Zakrzewski) September 10, 2021
Login to comment
Login to comment