Matty Erickson On August 13th, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that Apple did not violate antitrust laws by unlawfully monopolizing the market for iOS games. The lawsuit was brought by Epic Games, the developer of the popular video game Fortnite, which was removed from the App Store after Epic introduced a direct payment option that bypassed Apple’s in-app purchase system.
why apple didnt lose in the epic games ruling
The court found that Apple’s actions were not anticompetitive because the App Store is not a relevant market for Epic’s games. Epic argued that the App Store is a relevant market because it is the only place where iOS users can download and purchase apps. However, the court found that iOS users can also access a wide variety of app stores, including the Amazon Appstore, the Google Play Store, and Epic’s own website. The court also found that Apple’s 30% commission on in-app purchases is not an illegal monopoly price because it is comparable to the commissions charged by other app stores.
The history of the case
Epic Games first filed its lawsuit against Apple in August 2020, alleging that the App Store is a monopoly and that Apple’s 30% commission on in-app purchases is an illegal monopoly price. Epic also accused Apple of unlawfully tying the App Store to its iOS operating system, making it difficult for users to install alternative app stores. In December 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied Epic’s request for a preliminary injunction that would have allowed Fortnite to be reinstated on the App Store. The court found that Epic had not demonstrated that it would suffer irreparable harm if the game was not available on the App Store.
What the court ruled and why
The court ruled that Apple did not violate antitrust laws by unlawfully monopolizing the market for iOS games. The court found that the App Store is not a relevant market for Epic’s games because iOS users can access a wide variety of app stores, including the Amazon Appstore, the Google Play Store, and Epic’s own website. The court also found that Apple’s 30% commission on in-app purchases is not an illegal monopoly price because it is comparable to the commissions charged by other app stores. The court’s ruling is a victory for Apple, which has been facing antitrust scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators in the U.S. and Europe over its control of the App Store.
How this will impact the gaming industry
The court’s ruling is a victory for Apple, which has been facing antitrust scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators in the U.S. and Europe over its control of the App Store. The ruling is also a setback for Epic, which had hoped to use the lawsuit to force Apple to change its App Store policies. The impact of the ruling on the gaming industry is likely to be limited. The vast majority of mobile games are not available on the App Store, and the few that are available can be played on a wide variety of devices, including Android phones and tablets, iPhones and iPads, and even consoles and PCs.
The implications of the ruling for app developers and consumers
Are also likely to be limited. App developers will still be required to pay Apple’s 30% commission on in-app purchases, and consumers will still be unable to install alternative app stores on their iOS devices. The court’s ruling is a victory for Apple, which has been facing antitrust scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators in the U.S. and Europe over its control of the App Store. The ruling is a setback for Epic, which had hoped to use the lawsuit to force Apple to change its App Store policies.
About Author
