[ad_1]
A federal judge on Friday accepted Epic Games’ petition to ban any action by Apple against Unreal Engine, but denied the game maker’s offer to reinstall Fortnite on the App Store.
In her ruling, Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers granted and denied in part Epic’s preliminary injunction that sought to protect an affiliate developer account maintained by Unreal Engine and force Apple to restore. Fortnite after he pulled out to implement a direct payment option that violates the rules.
The ruling consolidates an earlier August decision and ensures that the current situation remains unchanged throughout a pending trial.
After an initial attempt to return Fortnite On the App Store, Epic launched a second legal effort in September. During the court hearings, Gonzales Rogers was largely not persuaded that either party take early action. She noted that a heavy burden fell on Epic to prove Apple’s alleged antitrust misconduct, and the company simply failed to put together a convincing argument.
“While consumers are feeling the impact of this litigation, the fact is that it is commercial disputes. A putative class action lawsuit on behalf of all developers on these
the exact same issues were already in progress when EpicGames violated the agreements, “Gonzales Rogers said in today’s ruling.” However, Epic Games has never adequately explained its rush, other than its disdain for the situation. The current situation is of his own making. ”
Similarly, Apple was unable to successfully argue that maintaining Epic’s affiliate developer account, Epic International, poses a risk of irreparable harm. However, deleting the account would deprive developers of access to the Unreal Engine.
“Apple’s aggressive targeting of separate contracts in an attempt to completely eradicate Epic Games and its affiliates from the iOS platform was unnecessary and jeopardized a thriving ecosystem of third-party developers,” the jurist wrote.
Apple and Epic agreed in late September that the case should be decided by the court rather than a jury. The proceedings are tentatively scheduled to begin in July 2021.
Recap of epic events
The disagreement between Apple and Epic Games began publicly on August 13, after Epic updated “Fortnite” on iOS and Android with a separate payment method for in-app purchases, bypassing App Store rules that required them to pass. by the Apple mechanism. Epic also discounted purchases made through the new system to encourage its use.
Within hours, Apple pulled “Fortnite” from the App Store for ignoring its App Store guidelines. Shortly thereafter, Epic filed a lawsuit demanding that it make changes to the App Store guidelines, including reducing its in-app purchase commission by 30% and allowing competing app stores to exist on iOS.
Epic also indicated that the company was looking forward to the application change, fallout, and lawsuit, as it also released a video parody of Apple’s “1984” Super Bowl commercial. The parody, which used characters from “Fortnite,” framed Epic as breaking Apple’s control over the App Store and the iOS ecosystem.
The marketing push, to try to get their players to side with Epic, later continued with the “FreeFortnite Cup” tournament, which featured a special skin and other prizes for participating. He also released a graphic for players to apply to their own clothing, sharing the same “Fortnite free” message.
On August 17, Apple threatened to prevent Epic from accessing its iOS and Mac developer tools and accounts before August 28, which would have affected both “Fortnite” and the Unreal Engine. Epic then filed a request for a temporary restraining order, which would prevent Apple from continuing to remove the “Fortnite” app and avoid “any adverse action” against the company.
In response to the request, Apple said it was a “problem that Epic has created itself” and could be easily fixed with a compatible game update. Apple would not “make an exception for Epic because we do not believe it is right to put its business interests before the guidelines that protect our customers.”
Another August 21 presentation from Apple included a chain of emails between the two companies, revealing that Epic had warned that it would implement a competitive in-game payment option and intention to create an Epic Games store. Epic gave Apple two weeks to respond with an “in principle” confirmation of both concepts, otherwise it would simply add the payment system anyway.
Apple’s response to Epic noted how Epic had made “hundreds of millions of dollars” from sales of in-app content, before emphasizing that the App Store guidelines promoted standards of security, privacy, content and quality.
Epic responded by saying that it would “no longer adhere to Apple’s payment processing restrictions” and that it would add the payment system to force Apple to take the lead. Later, Epic said that Apple’s argument against Epic’s ban to prevent access to the tools was incorrect, as it goes against Apple’s contracts and would significantly affect the developers using the tools, not just Epic. .
By the first hearing on August 24, Epic was unable to show the court that it would suffer irreparable harm from a ban, and the judge sided with Apple that it was Epic’s doing. The judge also ordered Apple not to take action against the Epic Games International developer account, used to manage the Unreal Engine licenses.
Beginning the second attempt on September 5, Epic filed a formal petition in court that Apple was actively violating antitrust protections and forcing Epic to “abide by their illegal restrictions.”
Apple responded to Epic’s filing on September 8 with a counterclaim, one that demanded that Epic be held liable for a breach of contract, in addition to banning its payment system from all Epic apps on the App Store. Apple also objected to Epic’s description of itself as a “modern corporate Robin Hood,” but instead compared it to a “multi-million dollar company that just doesn’t want to pay anything for the tremendous value it gets from the App Store.”
Epic began telling customers that Apple was withdrawing access to Sign In with Apple on September 9, but on September 10 it changed its tune to say that Apple had offered an “indefinite extension” for the feature. Apple issued a statement that it was not actively seeking to remove access to Sign in with Apple at all.
On September 16, Apple accused Epic of using its legal activity to commercialize the game, which Apple thought was losing popularity. Epic countered by saying that Apple had “selected” its data and that according to its own figures, daily users increased “more than 39% in a matter of months.
During the second hearing on September 28, Epic appeared to be failing in their attempts to get the judge to side with them and was reprimanded multiple times. This included the judge noting that it was an event created by Epic and that it could easily reduce any damage by returning to the status quo.
Epic’s strength from Apple’s hand was also bought by the judge, including how Epic wasn’t “frank” with Apple in the first place. There was even some rejection of Epic’s argument against Apple of comparing a smartphone to a game console due to size and portability reasons, with the judge noting that the Nintendo Switch exists.
