Court orders Apple to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine as it may harm 3rd party developers | MSPoweruser

Bernkastel

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
mspoweruser.com

Court orders Apple to not block Epic's Unreal Engine as it may harm 3rd party developers

Apple should not block Unreal Engine as it may affect 3rd party developers like Microsoft.
mspoweruser.com
epic-apple.jpg
 
Calverz said:
So apple win then? "Status quo maintained"????
Click to expand...
No, the status quo at the moment is that the unreal license etc is not terminated. That's what apple were going to do - terminate Unreal on iOS.

The second Apple beat Epic at trial though, that's when Apple pull the plug on all things Epic and Unreal stops working.

Good decision. I wholeheartedly disagree with what Epic did and are wanting, but until a verdict has been reached on that everyone else shouldn't be punished.
 
Last edited:
The judge sided with Epic on keeping Unreal in for now.
The judge sided with Apple on not re-instating Fortnite.

Unreal support stays for now.
Fortnite is gone.

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...te-and-epic-on-unreal-engine-updated.2251347/

Update: The judge overseeing the Apple v. Epic battle has granted a temporary restraining order that will prevent Apple blocking Epic's access to development tools for the Unreal Engine. The judge will not prevent Apple from terminating the Epic Games developer account, which will prevent Fortnite from being updated until Epic complies with the App Store rules.
 
Apple only threatened disabling UE to create a fake compromise

Epic wins the UE situation
Apple wins the Fortnite situation

In reality Apple wins
 
MrFunSocks said:
that the unreal license etc is not terminated.
Click to expand...
What license.

MrFunSocks said:
That's what apple were going to do - terminate Unreal on iOS.
Click to expand...
No, it was terminating it on iOS and MacOS.

smbu2000 said:
The judge sided with Epic on keeping Unreal in for now.
The judge sided with Apple on not re-instating Fortnite.
Click to expand...
The judge ruled banning Unreal unlawful.
The second part is the crux of the lawsuit which is yet to be decided., but the judge was fine with it being banned before the final decision.
 
Last edited:
llien said:
What license.


No, it was terminating it on iOS and MacOS.


The judge ruled banning Unreal unlawful.
The second part is the crux of the lawsuit which is yet to be decided., but the judge was fine with it being banned before the final decision.
Click to expand...
The judge ruled that banning Unreal *while the lawsuit is still ongoing* is not ok. That's all.
 
Twitter thread covering the hearing. Some quotes from the judge:
YGR: There also appears to be evidence that everyone who is using these platforms to sell these kinds of games is charging 30%. Whether or not Epic likes it, the industry, and not just Apple, seems to be charging that.
Click to expand...

But later:

YGR: If you have an iPhone you can't buy it [an app] from anyone else. You can't buy it from Google. You can't buy it from Amazon. So without competition, where is that 30% coming from? Why isn't it 10% or 15%? How is the consumer benefiting at all?
Click to expand...

Exclusive picture of Tim Sweeney at that exact moment:

8efgK92.jpg


Apple kept dancing around issues like them being a monopoly or how their decision to restrict Epic's access is not retaliatory. They also tried to argue Epic International S.a.r.l (the engine makers) are the same entity as Epic Games and were BTFO by the judge who told them they signed two separate contracts with two separate fees for the engine and the game.
 
MrFunSocks said:
The judge ruled that banning Unreal *while the lawsuit is still ongoing* is not ok. That's all.
Click to expand...
Not really all: "not only has the underlying agreement not been breached".

MrFunSocks said:
The second Apple beat Epic at trial though, that's when Apple pull the plug on all things Epic and Unreal stops working.
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar enough with US court system, to judge, if doing it purely out of retaliation is legal or not.
 
Last edited:
If people are unsure why Apple needs to course correct especially on the kind of Content approval they do (MS and Sony do not have content approval steps anymore, why if you care about censorship so much would this not be a sticking point here too?!) and how it has an effect on developers and their life and their products follow more developers and see what they are saying:
 
Last edited:
It's their platform, of course they have absolute power on it, they can take their business elsewhere and so can the consumers if a closed platform under apple's control shaped by apple's investments and under apple's needs and what they think are the market's needs that made that investment worthwhile are wrong (and in that case apple will organically change direction in order to chase profit, they won't be forced by being dragged to stupid trials by stupid moves like intentionally breaching contracts and expecting it to work out as renegotiating). If people can falsely claim monopoly when there's so much competition in the phone/tablet/pc space to rip a company's work off their hands why should any tech giant make anything any more and not just do PC/other open platforms software/parts? Including console companies, your distinction is, well, not. Anybody's beef with apple is simple to solve, don't buy apple products, don't work in support of apple products. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the other shit company in this case, Epic, who are clearly preaching they're the knight in shining armor you need when they would have just taken a deal that only benefit them and when they fuck up and use shit anti consumer and anti competitive practices on actually open platforms while they keep whining and wanting to leech off others even when they're free to publish games/stores as they see fit, just not take advantage of others' work for free.
 
Last edited:
Al3x1s said:
It's their platform, of course they have absolute power on it...
Click to expand...
Windows is Microsoft's platform and of course... wait, what were you saying?

Al3x1s said:
falsely claim monopoly
Click to expand...
It doesn't need to be a monopoly, to be illegal.
E.g. Steve Job was fined for filthy moves in book industry, when amazon complained. Amazon, Carl, company that had 90% of the said market.
en.wikipedia.org

United States v. Apple Inc. - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
.

Apple fined in France for price fixing Apple products:
uk.pcmag.com

Apple Fined $1.23B for Anti-Competitive Behavior in France

French authorities found anti-competitive behavior within Apple's distribution network, but also an abuse of economic dependence on the company's resellers.
uk.pcmag.com uk.pcmag.com
 
Last edited:
Yes, Microsoft has absolute power on Windows, they could have turned a new version of it into a closed platform, they didn't (actually they easily did, that version flopped so hard you forgot) because there was backlash and at the end of the day it would harm their business so they backpedaled, Apple has istuff closed since day 1, it didn't fool anyone and was actually successful with that model, it's apparently what tons of consumers who aren't me wanted (hence it didn't go the way of windows mobile for example), it also attracted developers to reach said consumers knowing full well they have to adhere to the terms apple wants in return for leeching off their decades worth of R&D investment to reach the point they're at, what's your point? I never said only monopolies are illegal (wtf? they actually aren't, plenty of legal monopolies going around if you search for them in different countries, but yeah, I never said anything of the sort, you're just being fucking dumb), idk who you're responding to with all that irrelevant stuff (I just said it's not a monopoly like some claimed, that's fact and unrelated to any MS case) as if every company has to run like Microsoft does by law. Their Xbox is a closed platform just the same, clearly different products and services and companies work as they see fit and different situations call for different rulings. Duh. Edit: yes, Windows 10 S existed entirely in my imagination, that's why you cut the quote, disingenuous moron.
 
Last edited:
Al3x1s said:
Yes, Microsoft has absolute power on Windows, they could have turned a new version of it into a closed platform, they didn't (actually they did, and that version flopped so hard you forgot) because there was backlash and at the end of the day it would harm their business so they backpedaled, Apple has istuff closed since day 1, it didn't fool anyone and was actually successful with that model, it's apparently what tons of consumers who aren't me wanted, it also attracted developers to reach said consumers, what's your point? I never said only monopolies are illegal (wtf?), idk who you're responding to with all that irrelevant stuff (I just said it's not a monopoly like some claimed, that's fact) as if every company has to run like Microsoft does by law. Their Xbox is a closed platform just the same, clearly different products and services and companies work as they see fit.
Click to expand...

MS was actually found guilty of monopolistic practices mate... not sure corporate apology for trillion dollar companies as if regular basic capitalistic market force easily applied either is really what the market or consumers needs. Surely, in the one device future where few Corps own everything this gives some fans peace of mind... Edit: corporate apologists may find the above very funny...
 
Last edited:
Al3x1s said:
Yes, Microsoft has absolute power on Windows, they could have turned a new version of it into a closed platform
Click to expand...
Good to know that you have rich imagination! :messenger_rocket:

But back to planet Earth and Milky Way, EU in it's ruling, NOT calling Microsoft a monopoly:
"Dominant companies have a special responsibility to ensure that the way they do business doesn't prevent competition ... and does not harm consumers and innovation," EU Competition Commissioner Mario Monti said. "Today's decision restores the conditions for fair competition in the markets concerned and establishes clear principles for the future conduct of a company with such a strong dominant position."
www.dw.com

Microsoft Slapped with Biggest Fine in EU History – DW – 03/24/2004

The European Union on Wednesday levied the largest fine against any company in the bloc's history, ruling that Microsoft must pay a half billion euros for abusing its "near monopoly" status.
www.dw.com www.dw.com

US:
Microsoft was found guilty of misbehaving on number of fronts, curiously, even in regards to Java, which, wait a sec, people could freely download from Sun and install. In US, Microsoft was referred to as a monopoly:
en.wikipedia.org

United States v. Microsoft Corp. - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
.
 
common sense and good news, as expected there are separate contracts at play here regarding engine and games, Apple trying to throw their weight around.
 
Can someone please explain how Apple is in the wrong here? Serious

to me (I'm certainly no law expert) it looks like epic is trying to force their way to their own store to increase their $$$ flow. I don't know if this is the case or not, but that's how it appears to me

Apple created the App Store, provides the platform for developers to reach an audience, and has their terms that developers agree to.
 
nordique said:
Can someone please explain how Apple is in the wrong here? Serious
Click to expand...

Under a strictly legal point of view, you are probably right. Apple is not in the wrong.

But in my point of view, the moral perspective is not as clear cut. Once a given platform reaches a certain mass/momentum, as iOS or Android has done, you as a consumer should be able to chose where to buy things. This applies to Xbox or PS stores too, though their social penetration is not in same level as iOS/Android, of course.

They should behave as Windows or MacOS. Let me choose seller, and let me take risks. I don't need you to build a walled garden, thanks. This is not a kindergarten where you have to take care of my safety.
 
Unity should (temporarily) lower prices to try and get developers to switch over since Epic is playing with their livelihood.
 
Interesting compromise. I wonder if Apple will appeal this or if they'll accept it and go to battle with EPIC over the storefront / digital bux disagreement.
 
nordique said:
Can someone please explain how Apple is in the wrong here?
Click to expand...
aries_71 aries_71 has pointed out "moral" argument, which isn't really a "moral" argument at all.
Ultimately, whether something is legal or not is determined by the basic principles, such as "is there competition? are interests of the customers harmed?". Violating those principles mean you are engage in illegal business (something Apple does routinely)

In this very thread we are discussing Apple's independent but related case.. Apple tried to nuke independent product in retaliation of the lawsuit on a different matter (as retarded as it is in the case when someone argues you do things that harm your customers)

If we are talking about that original fight, Epic has outlined its position:
Apple unlawfully maintains its monopoly power in the iOS App Distribution Market through the anti-competitive acts described herein, including by imposing technical and contractual restrictions on iOS, which prevents the distribution of iOS apps through means other than the App Store and prevents developers from distributing competing app stores to iOS users.
Apple unlawfully maintains its monopoly power in the iOS App Distribution Market through its unlawful denial to Epic and other app distributors of an essential facility—access to iOS—which prevents them from competing in the iOS App Distribution Market.
To reach iOS users, Apple forces developers to agree to Apple's unlawful terms contained in its Developer Agreement and to comply with Apple's App Store Review Guidelines, including the requirement iOS developers distribute their apps through the App Store. These contractual provision unlawfully foreclose the iOS App Distribution Market to competitors and maintain Apple's monopoly.
Apple has unlawfully maintained its monopoly in these markets through the anti-competitive acts alleged herein, including by forcing, through its contractual terms and unlawful policies, iOS app developers that sell in-app content to exclusively use Apple's In-App Purchase, and preventing and discouraging app developers from developing or integrating alternative payment processing solutions.
To reach iOS app users, Apple forces developers to agree to Apple's unlawful terms contained in its Developer Agreement, including that they use Apple's InApp Purchase for in-app purchases of in-app content to the exclusion of any alternative solution or third-party payment processor. Further, Section 3.1.3 of Apple's App Store Review Guidelines unlawfully prohibits developers from "directly or indirectly target[ing] iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase".
Apple is able to unlawfully condition access to the App Store on the developer's use of a second product—In-App Purchase—for in-app sales of in-app content. Through its Developer Agreement and unlawful policies, Apple expressly conditions the use of its App Store on the use of its In-App Purchase to the exclusion of alternative solutions in a per se unlawful tying arrangement.
Click to expand...

Apple would need to convince the judge that what they did was in the customer's interests (i.e ."Apple users are to dumb to use more than one payment system"). "It's our system so we decide to what degree to bend others over" won't fly, obviously.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like Apple might be in bigger doodoo than I expected. They might find a way to land eventually, but the number of available runways is shrinking. I see a real chance they'll be forced to trim the hairy scrotum a bit.
 
Last edited:
llien said:
Apple would need to convince the judge that what they did was in the customer's interests (i.e ."Apple users are to dumb to use more than one payment system"). "It's our system so we decide to what degree to bend others over" won't fly, obviously.
Click to expand...


with the rampant CC fraud online don't think the "Apple users are to dumb" thing really applies. If epic can do what stops some no name scam developer doing it and stealing your info.
 
From the bottom of my heart I hope Apple wins. No Epic. You don't get to lie about wanting a special treatment and through a tantrum when Apple refuse.
 
Warnen said:
with the rampant CC fraud online don't think the "Apple users are to dumb" thing really applies. If epic can do what stops some no name scam developer doing it and stealing your info.
Click to expand...

The same what stops no name scam developer of doing it right now.
 
Apple want to create their own development ecosystem, free of the gaming equivalent of the 3.5mm jack, so that they can lock people in to the 'lightning cable' of development suites.
 
hemo memo said:
From the bottom of my heart I hope Apple wins. No Epic. You don't get to lie about wanting a special treatment and through a tantrum when Apple refuse.
Click to expand...

So you're hoping a bunch of developers who follow the rules get fucked over and have their games removed from the platform then? That's what banning Epic from Apple's tools does because everyone who has an Unreal Engine game on iOS (and there are quite a few) would get kicked off as well.
 
Epic definitely fucked up, but Apple targeting 3rd party developers is a dick move. Just reach a compromise agreement but bleed Epic through the nose for the licensing.
 
Isn't this more of a question of why cant a consumer buy a product from the seller of their choice rather than a question of what Apple charges in their store?

If im on PS or xbox i can buy digitally but i can also go to amazon or Walmart.

What is the reason they limit comsumer choice and competition?

Or is that not relevant at all?
 
I think it's the right call and good on Phil to pointing this out. Removing Unreal from iOS seems like an overkill. That said Epic is still in the wrong.
 
ManaByte said:
So you're hoping a bunch of developers who follow the rules get fucked over and have their games removed from the platform then? That's what banning Epic from Apple's tools does because everyone who has an Unreal Engine game on iOS (and there are quite a few) would get kicked off as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about Unreal Engine if those are the rules then everyone of those devs should go and sue Epic because their stupidity is what led to them losing access to the iOS. Using Fortnite as a tool to direct fans anger at Apple when Epic asked for a special treatment? Really now?
 
Entirely for my own selfish needs - cool, cool cool cool. Fortnite is a blunt instrument in this war I don't care either way about, but losing Unreal Engine on apple platforms would be a huge blow.
 
LordOfChaos said:
Entirely for my own selfish needs - cool, cool cool cool. Fortnite is a blunt instrument in this war I don't care either way about, but losing Unreal Engine on apple platforms would be a huge blow.
Click to expand...

Apple has their own engine (Metal) that they want people to use. All Epic has to do is point that out and Apple loses on antitrust grounds.
 
Yoboman said:
Apple only threatened disabling UE to create a fake compromise

Epic wins the UE situation
Apple wins the Fortnite situation

In reality Apple wins
Click to expand...
This would be the case if apple does end up winning, which they have not as of yet. I don't believe they will win in court either. They are too big to be so restrictive. Apple builds general purpose computers and only allows you to get software through them.

Their peers (Google and MS) have the innate ability to run third-party software so they are protected. Let's pretend apple is an electric company, in this case it as if apple forbids it's customers from installing solar panels. Of course this is just an analogy but I think it gets the point across.

Let's remember that apple did not pioneer the idea of programmable software, their products ride on the coattails of many extremely intelligent people and investments that the American people have made to build modern computing infrastructure. It would be different if their operating system was based solely from proprietary code and technology.
 
Last edited:
ManaByte said:
Apple has their own engine (Metal) that they want people to use. All Epic has to do is point that out and Apple loses on antitrust grounds.
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure Metal is a proprietary low level graphics API based on OpenGL. In all Apple platforms you are restricted to Metal.
 
ManaByte said:
Apple has their own engine (Metal) that they want people to use. All Epic has to do is point that out and Apple loses on antitrust grounds.
Click to expand...

Metal is an API, not an engine.

As in, an engine like Unreal plugs into Metal like it would for DX12 on Windows.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Is Unreal Engine 5 truly dogshit, or just used improperly?
2 3
145
946
Karim replied
Evolution of Unreal Engine 1995-2025
Analysis Trailer Platform 
46
1K
IbizaPocholo replied
Seems like most third-party developers will not support Switch 2
Drama  4 5 6 7 8
365
3K
Kataploom replied
The Witcher 4 Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo: Digital Foundry Reaction!
42
984
IbizaPocholo replied
[Verge] Epic says Fortnite is coming back to iOS in the US; Due to Epic v. Apple Court Ruling
8
324
Codes 208 replied
Top Bottom