Apple’s only winning move is not to play, so Cook plays dumb and consequently Epic’s argument looks like speculation (and, as Apple would argue, fabulation). If it’s small, they’re just collecting the eggs (collecting rent via market power). Not having a hard number removes a potential foothold for Epic, which could use it either way: If it’s big, they’re protecting their golden goose (enforcing market power). To do otherwise would be folly.īut because the numbers are not publicly declared and broken down, and because they are likely to be somewhat fuzzy, Cook can say truthfully that there’s no single number like (to invent an amount) “App Store R&D was $500 million in 2019.” The differences between a conservative and liberal estimation of the App Store’s R&D allocation might be large, in the hundreds of millions perhaps, but make no mistake, those estimations are almost certainly being made internally.
#Epic vs apple code#
Even if it can’t be perfectly broken down - an advance in MacOS code may play into a feature on the App Store - the company must know to some extent how its resources are being deployed and to what effect. Now, that doesn’t sound right, does it? A company like Apple knows down to the penny how much it spends on its products and research. research budgets for individual products aren’t broken out from the rest. Specifically, he said that Apple couldn’t estimate how much of that money was directed toward the App Store, because “we don’t allocate like that,” i.e. The façade of innocent ignorance began when he was asked about Apple’s R&D numbers - $15-20 billion annually for the last three years. He admitted to a handful of conflicts with developers, such as differing priorities or needing to improve discovery, but said the company works constantly to retain developers and users. The questioning of Cook by his own company’s counsel was gentle and directed at reiterating the reasons why Apple’s App Store is superior and sufficient for iOS users, while also asserting the presence of stiff competition. Just turned to someone sitting next took him, said something and then laughed. His lawyer Gary Bornstein sporadically whispers in his ear. Part II covers the application of the facts to the law and includes the Court’s legal market definition and market power assessment, its findings under federal antitrust law (Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act) and state antitrust law (California’s Cartwright Act and Unfair Competition Law), and its breach of contract findings.Sweeney is sitting at Epic's counsel table looking down at his pen.
Part I of the summary covers the findings of fact, which includes the Court’s factual findings on the different product and geographic markets proposed by Epic Games and Apple, on the anticompetitive effects alleged by Epic Games, and on the business justifications put forward by Apple. Apple decision into a six-page overview covering all the main parts of the decision.
#Epic vs apple trial#
A yearlong trial ensued, the result of which is a 185-page decision, which was handed down by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on September 10, 2021.
Apple soon thereafter countersued for breach of contract. That same day, Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store and Epic Games filed an antitrust suit in a federal district court in California. After Apple refused, Epic Games violated the App Store rules by enabling its own payment method in the Fortnite iOS app on August 13, 2020. Dissatisfied with these policies, Epic Games tried to use its flagship game Fortnite as leverage to convince Apple to open up its closed platform. Through this system, Apple automatically collects a 30% commission on all such transactions. Apple similarly requires developers to exclusively use its own in-app payment system for app purchases and in-app purchases for digital content. For instance, Apple prohibits the distribution of iOS apps outside of the App Store, which Apple fully controls. By Natalia Moreno Belloso (European University Institute)Īt the heart of the legal battle between Epic Games and Apple is a set of restrictions Apple imposes on app developers.