I'm curious as to whether this ruling will in any way affect the outcome of the EU's current dispute with Apple. I doubt it, but at least it does give Apple a bit of respite in the US.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
US Supreme Court Declines to Hear Apple vs. Epic Games Case
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It would be no different then any free app. If you have payment issues, good luck, you have to deal with the developer.
The Macrumors story is difficult to understand, but if I'm reading another article correctly, this means that companies like Netflix or Spotify can state that it's cheaper to subscribe outside of the app store.
By not ruling, they did settle the matter.
3rd party app purchase is the main reason why Epic sued Apple. It is the most critical part.
No, as of now developers have the right to advertise in-app that there are other, cheaper, payment options available away from Apple's App Store.
While I feel sad about their decision, I acknowledge that Apple has once again got away with what would be bad for them.
As for epic, at least they tried, really tried, very hard. US is ruled by wealth after all, and Epic does not have that.
As for epic, at least they tried, really tried, very hard. US is ruled by wealth after all, and Epic does not have that.
This was the right decision. Apple is walling off EU to test the waters by opening up things more. If it goes well for their users and user experience isn't harmed they expand.
and when apple bans apps that put in links to other ways to pay? or say stuff like with apple app store they take 30% of your donation? (facebook) had that issue.
Not necessarily. Apple could choose to start charging developers who don't use IAP similar to what they did in the Netherlands dating app situation.
Apple collects a $100 a year from devs. That alone is going to cover almost all if not all the hosting fees. Also Apple is choosing to not allow another way to developers and publishers to get apps out to user not threw the App store so Apple choice there that they have to accept some of the cost.
In comparison Googles is $25 life time. Well semi life time after 10 years of punishing nothing they will remove y your developer account and if you want to publish something new you have to pay a new $25 but if you punish anything it is one time fee for life.
Remember Apple chooses to block side loading so Apple has choosen to have to absorb extra cost.
By declining the case, the Supreme Court is saying that they agree with the previous court, and there is no reason to re-try it.
I dont think it will give them any affect on the EU. I expect the EU ruling will speed up the process of them do the same thing here in the US. Apple is going to run it greed setup as long as possible but they know the hammer is coming down and the question more when will Apple allow side loading and force reduce control
Right for Apple, and that’s all that matters. As for everyone else, it’s up to their own.
Only Apple walks out of this legal marathon laughing. (Alongside all the lawyers representing Apple)
It's unlikely that the $100/year per developer covers Apple's hosting costs, let alone the rest of the costs of running the App Store. But feel free to source your claim if you have evidence.
Finally, Epic’s ridiculousness is put to an end.
It strikes a balance between letting Apple maintain monopoly power within their marketplace (preventing sideloading) and also allowing consumers who want to avoid the apple tax by paying for app services outside of the Apple payment system. This forces Apple to make the in-app purchase experience more desirable, and has a modest restraining impact on the apple tax
Then they'll get sued. The ruling makes it clear that apps/devs are allowed notify consumers in the app of other ways to purchase a subscription.
Did you read the case? Epic barely tried— this was a vanity suit that Epic thought they could win as a popularity contest “Your kids love Fortnite and hate Apple, so side with us.”
Seriously, read the ruling. Epic never had much of a leg to stand on, but they were also lazy in their approach as was pointed out by the judge throughout her ruling.
Sweeney wanted to present himself as a populist hero, and maybe he convinced some people he was, but in the end this wasn’t about protecting consumers it was about wanting to muscle in on territory. I was going to make a Don Quixote reference but Quixote was at least pure of heart, Sweeney has all the delusions of grandeur but none of the good intentions.
Cool, so you no doubt just got rid of the perfectly functional Lightning cables?
In ten years when there's maybe a "new USB-C", will the EU force everyone on to that, and thus cause us to repeat the cycle of throwing out cables?
Maybe the EU should focus on bigger "problems" that the bloc is currently facing.