Epic appeals loss to Apple in App Store Case

On Sunday, “Fortnite”-maker Epic Games filed a notice of appeal following a judge’s decision in its antitrust lawsuit against Apple that went mostly Apple’s way.

Epic Games' Fortnite
Epic Games’ Fortnite

Mark Gurman for Bloomberg News:

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers mostly sided with Apple, rejecting Epic’s claims that the iPhone maker is a monopoly. She also didn’t rule that Apple needs to restore Fortnite, Epic’s hit game at the center of the lawsuit, to the App Store or Epic’s Apple developer account. She also rejected the need for third-party App Stores and didn’t force Apple to lower its App Store revenue cut of 15% to 30%… She also ordered Epic to pay at least $4 million in damages to Apple for breach of contract, which included collecting payments outside of Apple’s in-app-purchase system.

The judge, however, said that Apple has engaged in some anticompetitive conduct and she ordered the Cupertino, California-based technology giant to allow all app and game developers to steer consumers to outside payment methods on the web. All developers for the first time could be able to include a button in their apps to let users pay for transactions online, circumventing Apple’s fees.

MacDailyNews Take: Apple’s statement to the press on Friday following the ruling:

Today the Court has affirmed what we’ve known all along: the App Store is not in violation of antitrust law. As the Court recognized ‘success is not illegal.’ Apple faces rigorous competition in every segment in which we do business, and we believe customers and developers choose us because our products and services are the best in the world. We remain committed to ensuring the App Store is a safe and trusted marketplace that supports a thriving developer community and more than 2.1 million U.S. jobs, and where the rules apply equally to everyone.


  1. If Apple needs to protect us from Epic, then why does no one need to protect us from Apple? If the Apple store really isn’t a monopoly, then neither was Microsoft. The free market “chose” Windows ME over MacOS X. We understood then that that didn’t prove that ME was better or that customers liked bugs. We don’t like Apple demanding 30% of a company’s revenue for virus scans either. But we are stuck for the same reason buyers of Windows ME were.

    1. Microsoft was not convicted of being a monopoly. Microsoftw ae convicted of using monopolistic power (at the time they had about 56-98% of the desktop market depending on whose numbers you used and nearly that in servers) to force an expansion into a new territory. They claimed that Internet Exploree, crit, critical,icalcessary and integral part of Windows and could not be removed without crig beinWindows. With it being an integral part of Windows it came for “free”. This was a direct move to expand Microsoft’s tiny browser market share at the time and a move to kill all other competitor browsers on the Windows platform.
      That move was what was deemed clearly an illegal use of monopolistic power. Microsoft’s move was to in the browser spacego from << 10% installed base to up to 98% installed base by claiming it go,as an integral part of,indows — and
      it was “free”.
      It was also shown at trial that Internet Explorer really was not a critical component of Windows (even the versions in which Internet Explorer was built in) as witnesses de in detailscribed how to remove the browser functionality without crippling scribed

      Yes, there were other issues brought up at trial including several elements related to QuickTime and such, but the core of the trial was about Internet Explorer and how Microsoft was illegally implementing it.
      The situation with Apple and Epic is very different. First, Apple’s desktop (and even phonemarket share ) does not have anywhere near 50% of the market, vastly different than Microsoft’s 95+% of the market. Second, Apple is not using it’s app store to expand the market for an applicat) ion that wouldor even could) replace Fortnite. Third, Apple is charging a similar percentage to other stores (Sony, Microsoft, Google, etc.) so the fees could easily be considered “usual and customary”. (I’m sure the vast majority of developers don’t like paying those fees, but that’s not a legal reason to claim they are improper.)are

      1. Agree and you are correct on MS’s methods of using their monopolistic powers. They also had contracts with major distributors and major name brand computer manufacturers forbidding them from using any OS other than their (MS-Windows) own.

        I believe it was an oversight that brought about MS undoing with the tiniest of agreements – by MS lawyers that required ” EULA agreement” to use Windows in a newly purchased computer. IF you disagreed and did not accept the MS Windows EULA upon starting the new computer the first time, MS could not force the new user to run Windows. And I believe it was an Aussie that did this. (I could be wrong.) At that point, and by not signing the EULA, buyers were permitted to install Linux or other OS. Until then MS dictated to other stores could sell. That was their contract.

        AND that is just the tip of the iceberg on how MS had a monopoly. People born since the mid ’80s are probably totally unaware of what kind of monopoly abuse that MS did and got away with in the late ’80s through the mid – and late 90’s.

    2. Microsoft was an extreme monopoly, buying up competing companies to shit them down, forcing partners into exclusive deals against competitors, hard wiring code to sabotage competing products, taking open standards and making it their own proprietary products to lock out the smaller players.

      Apple grew massive by creating popular products that individuals are willing to spend $$&$ for. Being popular is not being a monopoly.

      1. Neither does being popular prove you AREN’T a monopoly. It is what you DO that matters. Apple’s restrictions on content did not exist when I bought into the platform. I should not have to choose between to things that I’ve always had before.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.