The American judge who chaired the sensational antitrust case of Epic Games against Apple did not want to give both sides a full victory.
Kate Adams, Apple’s chief advocate, said the pronunciation ” A big win ”, which points to the court’s ruling that ‘Apple is not a monopoly under’ federal or state laws’.
However, the iPhone maker is being forced to let developers in the US bypass the App Store’s in-app payment tool by including links or directions to ‘purchase mechanisms’ outside the platform.
Apple has not decided whether it will appeal. But if the sentence is upheld, it means more than $ 60 billion in App Store transactions per year will soon be competitive – which could deprive the iPhone maker of billions in high-margin revenue at a cost of 15-30 percent which critics call the “apple tax”.
Still, Epies, which makes the popular Fortnite game, was dissatisfied and confirmed that it would appeal against the decision. What he really wanted was a frictionless in-app payment mechanism that deprived Apple of the cut, rather than the ability to link to a payment website outside the app.
Epic also wanted to completely crawl around the App Store and allow people to download the game on their devices, just like on a computer. And it wanted Judge Apple to declare an illegal monopoly. It lost both arguments.
Here are four key points to keep in mind on Friday:
1. ‘The court concludes that Apple’s anti-governance provisions conceal important information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice. These anti-theft terms are combined with Apple’s initial antitrust violations, and it’s a nationwide solution to eliminate those terms. ” Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers
While the court failed to declare appeal as an illegal monopoly, it was clear that he was involved in competitive actions that needed to be rectified.
Developers have been complaining about such actions for years. Players from Fortnite, developed by Epic, was able to buy an in-game currency, known as ‘V-dollar’, online, but these credits do not appear when playing on the iPhone.
Gonzalez Rogers’ solution would change that – a notable victory, even if it does not fully meet Epic.
Earlier this month Apple made concession for “browser programs” that allow Netflix and Spotify to be paid for directly by consumers, as long as they are outside the app. Friday’s ruling actually extends to gaming apps that make up more than 70 percent of all revenue from the App Store.
2. “Apple provides a secure and reliable user experience on iOS, which encourages users as well as developers to trade freely and is mutually beneficial.” González Rogers
If Apple calls the verdict “a big win,” that’s what it’s all about.
Apple’s entire business relationship with thousands of developers is right, and the court has ruled that its framework is valid and competitive. The security measures and the App Review process – all dismissed by Epic as’ safety theater ‘- are seen as a’ strict ‘competitive distinction for Apple’.
It’s easy to think that Apple is quoting in courtrooms around the world that Gonzalez Rogers says that it and developers ‘have symbiotically benefited from the ever-increasing innovation and growth in the iOS ecosystem’.
3. “It seems like nothing but legal action is encouraging Apple to reconsider the price and lower the rates.” Gonzalez Rogers
Despite Gonzalez Rogers not finding Apple to be a monopoly under federal or state law, Gonzalez Rogers did not abandon it altogether.
She scolded the company for consumer behavior, agreed with Epic’s experts that the App Store’s margin was “extraordinarily high” at more than 72 percent, and said the gambling industry was unfairly subsidizing the rest of the developer community.
In the quote above, she made a remark by CEO Tim Cook that Apple had reduced certain fees by half to 15 percent out of sympathy for suffering during the coronavirus pandemic and a desire to promote competition. She cites managers who acknowledge the decision is also about looming disputes.
4. “Today’s verdict is not a victory for developers or consumers. Epic fights for fair competition between payment methods in the app and app stores for a billion consumers. ” Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games
The CEO’s tweet and the confirmation that Epic is appealing against the verdict indicate that the final outcome of this argument is at least a year away.
Among the losers are Fortnite fans, as Sweeney said Epic does not intend to reintroduce the popular game on iPhones until it can offer ‘in-app payment in fair competition with Apple’.
Apple was unequivocal that its in-app payment would not be offered to any third party, nor did the judge deem it necessary to include it in its ordered remedy.
In general, and despite Epic’s statement that it will appeal, the lawsuit brings the biggest forced change to the iPhone since its launch in 2007.
#techFT provides news, commentary, and analysis on the major enterprises, technologies, and issues that are driving the fastest moving sectors of specialists around the world. click here #techFT in your inbox.
The ruling is likely to be “very beneficial for software companies that can now sell their products on iOS without having to pay 30% of each sale to Apple,” said Christian Owens, CEO of revenue tax platform Paddle.
He added that Apple’s enthusiastic support for the ruling could be strategic, given the intense pressure it has come under developers and antitrust bodies around the world.
“If you’re in a fight, you fight, but if the whole world seems to be rising up against you, you accept the change,” he said. “Apple has millions of developers, so it’s a logical reason to return to the good grace of the developer community.”