• @rtxn
    link
    English
    573 months ago

    You’re talking about the same Epic that intentionally broke TOS, threw a tantrum when it was correctly kicked off the store, responded with a prepared 80-page lawsuit a day later, lost on all but one count, and is now strutting around pretending it was all for the players while taking their money by the fistful.

      • @rtxn
        link
        English
        11
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Wow, what a freedom fighter.

        Apple’s (and Google&Co’s) walled garden policies are absolute bullshit and should be outlawed, but in this, Epic is in the wrong. They agreed to a contract, they didn’t like it, so they chose to break it. Besides, saying that you “support something” does fuck all. Go and do something. Call a politician and get the law changed, you rebel.

        • @hate2bme
          link
          English
          133 months ago

          To be fair, calling a politician will do fuck all to change a law, unless you have a giant bag of money, which Google and apple have.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          53 months ago

          Besides, saying that you “support something” does fuck all.

          So what? Am I not allowed to express my opinion because of that?

          Also, my politicians have already started to outlaw these practices. There is obviously still much work to be done but it’s happening.

        • JackbyDev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          53 months ago

          They agreed to a contract, they didn’t like it, so they chose to break it.

          What was the contract?

          • @rtxn
            link
            English
            8
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            The relevant part in simple terms: if an app is distributed on the App Store, all in-app purchases must be made through the App Store (so Apple can have their 30%), the app can’t bypass this, and the app can’t contain links/buttons/calls to action to have the user bypass it. Epic implemented their own independent in-app purchase solution that violated this, and they got kicked out.

            Whether or not the 30% cut is fair is not relevant to the topic. I think it’s a baseless amount, and Apple’s walled garden is clearly anti-competitive and anti-consumer. The point is that Epic’s violation of the TOS was a premeditated action in order to inject their fake “for the players” narrative into their litigations and rally the Fortnite-addicted kids who didn’t know better. They had an 80-page lawsuit and a pissing CGI short film ready on the day. Apple wants all of the money, Epic wants all of the money, and they’re not above using every dirty trick they know.

            Obligatory IANAL, and this is old info, TOS may have changed. Hoeg Law on Youtube specializes in video games, it probably has a more in-depth and up-to-date analysis of the situation.

            • JackbyDev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              43 months ago

              Specifically because Apple is engaging in anti competitive and anti consumer practices (your words) I have a very difficult time seeing this action as “dirty.” Companies will do what companies do and pursue money, but if their pursuit of money coincidentally happens to fight for consumer rights then I don’t think we should say it’s dirty.

              Sort of like “if you don’t have your own, store bought is fine” lol

              • @atrielienz
                link
                English
                13 months ago

                They didn’t have to play. That’s the point. They didn’t have to agree to the contract. But since they did agree (and then intentionally broke the contract), they’re wrong too. They can’t be absolved of their part in this because the other party also did wrong. This is a two wrongs don’t make a right situation.

                • JackbyDev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  23 months ago

                  I’m not saying they shouldn’t face consequences, I’m saying we shouldn’t view it as a dirty trick.

                  • @atrielienz
                    link
                    English
                    1
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    This I actually agree with except that they tried to use their users as a cudgel against the company they tried to defraud.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      They broke TOS in order to serve the letter. You can’t sue for something that doesn’t affect you. Saying they threw a tantrum is disgraceful

      And they should have won the Apple suit but Apple was deemed to not have a large enough market share to have a monopoly…even if they have a monopoly on Apple products

      It was terrible news for consumers

    • @halcyoncmdr
      link
      English
      13 months ago

      Eh a lot of TOS bullshit is exactly that. And Apple is very far from perfect, especially with anything that could even think of threatening their walled garden. I assume everything Apple does is bad for the consumer, because 99% of the time that’s accurate.