No matter who you believe is right in the Apple/Epic battle, it’s hard not to admire the planning that entered into the Fortnite maker’s surprise attack on Apple.
The business plainly understood precisely what it was doing. For the video game company, there was truly very little to lose.
How the Apple/Epic fight unfolded
Let’s begin with a quick recap of what took place
Fortnite is a massively popular freemium video game. You can download it free of charge, however, the company succeeds from in-app purchases. The video game produced over $100M in its first 90 days and a month later was reported to have actually struck a cool billion dollars. It was still the top-grossing video game this year.
Apple takes 30% of that income. (Google does the same for the Android variation, though it is possible to sideload Fortnite and bypass the Google Play store.)
Epic wasn’t happy about Apple and Google taking such a substantial cut, so the business decided to take on the tech giants head-on. It offered a direct payment choice, using in-app currency at a 20% discount rate for those who selected to purchase directly from Epic rather than via Apple or Google.
That action was, obviously, in direct infraction of the terms of service of both app shops, and Apple responded exactly as Epic expected it to: by removing the app from the store.
Today, Epic Games took the unfortunate action of breaking the App Store guidelines that are applied similarly to every designer and designed to keep the store safe for our users. As a result their Fortnite app has actually been removed from the shop. Epic allowed a feature in its app which was not reviewed or authorized by Apple, and they did so with the express intent of violating the App Store guidelines relating to in-app payments that apply to every developer who offers digital products or services.
Impressive had a claim all drawn-up and ready to submit and right away pressed the button on this. The lawsuit accuses Apple of antitrust infractions. Not only that, however, Epic states it doesn’t just wish to win for itself but to alter Apple’s policies for everybody.
Epic brings this suit to end Apple’s unreasonable and anti-competitive actions that Apple carries out to unlawfully maintain its monopoly in two distinct, multibillion dollar markets: (i) the iOS App Distribution Market, and (ii) the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market.
Epic is not looking for a monetary settlement from this Court for the injuries it has suffered. Nor is Epic looking for favorable treatment for itself, a single business. Instead, Epic is looking for injunctive relief to enable fair competition in these 2 key markets that directly impact hundreds of millions of customers and 10s of thousands, if not more, of third-party app developers.
That wasn’t the only component of Epic’s preparation for this fight: the game-maker had likewise created a video parody of Apple’s famous 1984 advertisement, claiming that Apple was once the upstart rebel combating against evil overlords, and had now changed sides.
Epic Games has defied the App Shop Monopoly. In retaliation, Apple is obstructing Fortnite from a billion gadgets.
That video is quickly heading towards 2 million views in just 24 hours.
The 4 possible results (from six at first)
The Apple/Epic fight might go in any case, but this is successfully a no-lose circumstance for the Fortnite developer. There were six possible results when Epic started this:
(A seventh possibility has actually been suggested in the comments: that Epic loses, and Apple doesn’t let them back into the App Store even after getting rid of the direct payment choice. There’s absolutely no possibility of this occurring: Apple would lose its 30% cut; would lose its capability to state it treats everyone equally; and would appear like a spiteful bully.)
The very first didn’t happen. It was never likely, but there is precedent, so it was at least a possibility. The 2nd remains theoretically possible, but it appears quite clear from Apple’s instant reaction and a declaration that the business has no strategies to give an inch. Realistically, then, four possibilities stay.
Apple settles
Initially, Apple might pick to settle the case, either prior to or throughout the trial. The Cupertino business doesn’t typically pull back from a court fight, so I put on it think it likely, however, there is precedent for that too, so I wouldn’t rule it out. That settlement couldn’t be for Epic – just– it would have to be for all developers –– else there would simply be an endless stream of copycat cases pointing out the precedent.
Epic wins
Second, Epic might win the claim, and Apple could be required to alter its App Shop policies or commission rates. In our survey, half of you were sturdily on Apple’s side, but more than a 3rd of you believed the company ought to rethink its approach.
Anytime two huge businesses go to fight in court, they are chancing. Juries are unforeseeable, and this one could go either way. Impressive has a strong argument that customers would be better off without Apple taking such a large cut, and has actually supplied a really visible presentation of this with its $8 versus $10 choices.
Apple in turn will argue that it has actually created an enormous market for developers like Impressive, which its cut is reasonable for offering access to more than 1.5 billion gadgets. Impressive will counter that this number is itself evidence of a monopoly or, at least, duopoly with Google.
A jury might easily take the view that Apple would do simply great taking a smaller sized cut, and that the customer benefit surpasses the advantage of a two-trillion dollar business making a larger revenue.
Epic loses, however legislators act
Third, Impressive loses the claim, but the promotion is enough to influence the numerous lawmakers around the world who bring out antitrust investigations into Apple. Not everyone agrees, however, my personal view is that this is the instructions in which the tide is moving, so I wouldn’t be remotely shocked to see this result.
Absolutely nothing changes
Nothing modifications. Impressive loses the court case, and lawmakers do what they so typically wind up doing after all the intense words: absolutely nothing. The Apple/Epic fight dies. That, too, wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
Apple is the party at risk here, Not Impressive
What’s significant here is that Apple would lose in 5 of the initial 6 situations. Epic loses in none of them. The worst that could occur from Epic’s point of view is absolutely nothing changes circumstance, in which case it just shrugs, removes the direct payment option, and is back into the App Store. It loses a bit of interim income, but that may well be stabilized out (or more) by all the promotion generated by the case, and by producing goodwill from customers who see the business as having actually made a valiant bid to stand up for the little man.
