Angela Lang/CNET

Sherlock and Watson, peanut butter and jelly, Netflix and chill. Since 08, Apple has created that will sort of inextricable hyperlink between its iPhones plus its App Store. The carrier’s “there’s an app regarding that” ad-campaign drew thousands of people, who through the years have bought more compared to a billion iPhones. And since the App Store was your only place to obtain programs for the apple iphone, millions of developers flocked to Apple too. Now the tech giant is usually facing questions about whether it’s running a monopoly, forced into the subject by Fortnite maker Epic Games and Epic’s lawsuit alleging an abuse of energy. 

On Monday, Apple may face off against Epic in the California court over a seemingly benign issue around payment processing plus commissions. In short: Apple demands app developers make use of its payment processing anytime selling in-app digital products, just like a new look regarding a Fortnite character or even a celebratory dance proceed to perform after an earn.

The iPhone maker says that will using its payment digesting setup guarantees security plus fairness, and it takes up to 30% commission upon those sales in component to help run the App Store. Epic, however, states Apple’s policies are monopolistic and its commissions way too high.

On its surface, the particular lawsuit reads like the corporate slap fight regarding who gets how a lot money when we most buy stuff in applications. But the outcome associated with this case could alter everything we all know not simply about the App Store, yet about how mobile dealings focus on other platforms such as the Google Play store. It could invite further overview from lawmakers, who are usually already looking at whether or not companies like Apple plus Google wield too a lot power.

“This is the particular frontier of antitrust legislation,” said David Olson, a good associate professor who instructs about antitrust on the Boston College Law School.

Now playing: Watch this particular: Epic Games v. Apple: Trial preview

6:forty seven

What makes this situation unusual, Olson said, is it attempts to challenge exactly how modern tech companies function. Apple touts its “walled garden” approach — exactly where it’s approved every application that’s offered for selling on its App Store given that the from 2008 — as a feature associated with its devices, promising that will users can trust any kind of app they download mainly because it’s been vetted.

Aside from charging an upward to 30% fee regarding in-app purchases, Apple demands app developers to adhere to policies against what believes objectionable content, for example porn material, encouraging drug use, or even realistic portrayals of loss of life and violence. Apple furthermore scans submitted apps regarding security issues and junk e-mail.

“Apple’s requirement that each iOS app undergo rigorous, human-assisted review — with testers representing 81 languages vetting on average 100,1000 submissions per week — is crucial to its capability to conserve the App Store since a secure and reliable platform for consumers in order to discover and download software program,” the company mentioned in a single of its filings.

For its component, Epic has argued that will Apple’s strict power over the App Store is anticompetitive which the particular court should force the particular company to allow choice app stores and transaction processors on its cell phones. “Apple is bigger, a lot more powerful, more entrenched plus more pernicious than monopolies of yesteryear,” Epic said in an August legal filing. “Apple’s dimension and reach far surpasses that of any technologies monopolist in history.”

Epic isn’t the just company making this situation. Music streaming service Spotify notably complained to European Union regulators, saying that Apple’s 30% commission and App Store rules breached EU competitors laws. On Friday, the EU’s competition commissioner said that will a preliminary investigation discovered “consumers losing out” since a result of Apple’s policies. Apple will possess an opportunity to react to the commission’s arguments ahead of one last common sense on the matter. If it loses, Apple might be slapped with a good as high as 10% of the annual revenue and end up being required to change exactly how it applies fees in order to streaming services, at minimum inside the EU.

Apple is usually also facing increasing overview in the US, exactly where lawmakers earlier in April held a hearing along with representatives from the apple iphone maker and Google, since well as from Spotify, dating app creator Match and tracking device maker Tile. During the listening to, both Spotify and Tile argued that Apple’s moves had been monopolistic. (They made comparable arguments about Google as well.)

If Apple loses its lawsuit with Epic, it could end up being forced to change exactly how apps are distributed plus monetized across its iPhones and iPads.

“I’ll end up being really interested to find out exactly how much Apple argues, “This is our successful business structure and this is what’s on the line,'” Olson said. Judges are typically wary associated with completely upending a productive business on a concept that it could market more competition and reduce prices. But not usually. “If you’re a particular judge, you might state, ‘Great! Let’s do this,'” he added.


Apple’s App Store helped associated with iPhone exactly what it is today.

Angela Lang/CNET

Monopoly or not?

Legal experts and people at the rear of the particular scenes of the trial say the most difficult argument Epic will require to make is showing that iPhone users possess been harmed by Apple’s policies.

Antitrust laws in america outlaw “every contract, mixture, or conspiracy in restraining of trade,” based on a summation of the particular rules written by the particular Federal Trade Commission, which oversees numerous of the antitrust problems for the US govt. Antitrust laws also stop “monopolization, attempted monopolization, or even conspiracy or combination in order to monopolize.” The FTC notes that an essential part of judging these types of issues is is whether the restraint of trade is usually “unreasonable.”

In the particular Apple case, that means its payment processing. Epic, and other critics, state Apple’s requirement that programmers use its payment digesting is within itself monopolistic. 

Apple argues that the commission is fair, plus thus the payment digesting structure isn’t unreasonable. Apple has kept its 30% commission consistent since the particular App Store’s launch in 08, and the iPhone creator says industry practices prior to then charged app programmers much more. Furthermore, this hired a team associated with economists to help show its practices aren’t anticompetitive.

In their report, the particular economists Apple hired mentioned commission rates lower “the barriers to entry regarding small sellers and programmers by minimizing upfront obligations, and reinforce the marketplace’s incentive to advertise matches that will generate high long-term worth.” They didn’t seem into whether the costs stifle innovation or are usually fair, concerns that Epic and other developers possess raised. 

Agitating alter


Fortnite is one associated with the most popular video games available.

Angela Lang/CNET

Up till this past year, Apple and Epic seemed to have a great relationship. Apple invited the particular software developer onstage in its events to exhibit away games like Project Sword, a one-on-one fighting game later called Infinity Blade.

But Epic wasn’t just a popular developer. It also began pushing the industry for change. In 2017, Epic briefly allowed Fortnite players on Sony’s PlayStation and Microsoft’s Xbox to compete with one another. This was a feature Sony in particular had resisted with other popular games, like Rocket League and Minecraft. So when Epic removed the function, players blamed Sony and began a social media pressure campaign against the company. Sony relented a year later.

In 2018, Epic opened its Epic Games Store for PCs, a competitor to the industry-leading Valve Steam store. Its key feature was charging developers 12% commission on game sales, far below the industry standard of 30%. Epic also paid for exclusivity rights to highly anticipated games, forcing gamers to use its store to play highly anticipated titles like Gearbox Software’s sci-fi shooter Borderlands 3, Deep Silver’s postapocalyptic thriller Metro: Exodus and the epic story game Shenmu 3.

Gamers, though, bristled at the move. They didn’t like having to install another app store to get access to some of their games. They complained that Epic’s store didn’t have social networking, reviews and other features they preferred from Valve’s store. And now they’d have to go through all that if they wanted to buy these hot new titles.

“I wish there were a more popular way to do this,” Tim Sweeney, Epic’s CEO, said in a 2019 interview with CNET. But a survey by the Game Developers Conference, released just before our interview, underscored Sweeney’s point, finding among other things that a majority of game developers weren’t sure Valve’s Steam justified its 30% cut of revenue. “I feel like the ends are more than worth the means,” Sweeney said.


Apple iPhone and iPad owners haven’t been able to download the game since last August.


Project Liberty

Epic’s next target was big. In 2019, the company convened executives, lawyers and public relations experts to plan a public fight with Apple. Epic wanted to run its own app store and payment processing on the iPhone, according to documents filed with the courts. Epic even gave the initiative a name: Project Liberty.

To help make its case, Epic planned to lower the price for Fortnite’s “V-Bucks” in-game currency, which people used to buy new looks for their characters and weapons. It prepared a hashtag campaign, #FreeFortnite. And it helped form a good advocacy group, the Coalition for App Fairness.

Epic also devised a marketing push, with a video reminiscent of Apple’s famous Super Bowl ad, which, in a tech-inspired spin upon George Orwell’s novel 1984, had painted the original Macintosh as the savior. Now, though, Epic cast Apple as the evil Big Brother.

The project was organized in secret, according in order to depositions filed with the court. Epic “didn’t want anybody — Apple notwithstanding, anybody, users included, to — to understand that we were thinking about doing this until we decided to actually pull the trigger,” David Nikdel, lead of online gameplay systems for Epic, said in his testimony. Project Liberty was on a “need-to-know basis.”

Early on Aug. 13, Sweeney sent an email informing Apple it would no longer adhere to Apple’s payment processing restrictions, and turned on hidden code that allowed users to buy V-Bucks directly from Epic for a 20% discount. Epic made the same move with Google too, and both companies swiftly removed Fortnite from their respective app stores that day. Though Epic sued both companies in response, the Project Liberty marketing campaign was squarely aimed at Apple.

“Epic Games has defied the App Store Monopoly. In retaliation, Apple is blocking Fortnite from a billion devices,” Epic wrote in its ad, called Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite and posted to YouTube. “Join the fight to stop 2020 from becoming ‘1984.’”

Messy fight


Before the pandemic, people filled stadiums by the thousands to watch Fortnite competitions.

Getty Images

Apple’s and Epic’s case is being argued before a judge, in a “bench trial,” and not before a jury. US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who’s overseeing the case, has indicated she’s closely read the filings and learned the technical sides of Apple’s and Epic’s arguments. As a result, both camps are likely to dive into the legal weeds much faster than they would with a jury, whose members would need to get up to speed on the law and the details behind the case. 

No matter the decision, it’s almost certainly going to be appealed. And in the meantime, regulators, lawmakers and competitors will be watching closely to see how much Apple’s and Epic’s arguments could shape new approaches to antitrust.

“Concerns regarding anticompetitive behavior among tech companies are being heard worldwide,” said Valarie Williams, a partner with law firm Alston & Bird’s antitrust team, in an analysis of the case. “While the outcome of Epic Games v. Apple is not expected to rewrite the nation’s antitrust laws, it could be the tip of the iceberg.”

With so much on the line, the companies could consider settling before a judgment is handed down. But people connected to the lawsuit don’t think that’ll happen, in part because there isn’t much middle ground between the two companies’ arguments.

Apple could lower its payment processing fees, which it’s already done for subscription services and developers who ring up less than $1 million in revenue each year


Apple frequently points to its App Store as a key selling point of the iPhone.

James Martin/CNET

But allowing another payment processing service onto the iPhone could be a first crack in Apple’s argument that its strict App Store rules are built for the protection and trust of its users. If app developers could use any payment processor they wished, why couldn’t they use different app Stores too?

Epic has also argued that price isn’t the only issue it’s focused on. The company wants to choose technologies it uses in its Fortnite game as well.

That’s all why industry watchers say they expect the case to continue. Both Apple and Epic are large, well funded and notoriously obstinate.

“It’s easy to say it’s David vs. Goliath, but this is like Goliath vs. Godzilla,” said Michael Pachter, a longtime video game industry analyst at Wedbush Securities. “Tim Sweeney is a moral, ethical and quite opinionated person who genuinely believes he’s right, and will tilt at windmills because he’s convinced he’s right and it’s the right thing to do.”

Pachter predicts Apple’s argument around security of payment processes won’t hold up, considering Epic already successfully takes payment for V-Bucks on its own website and platforms. And when it broke Apple’s rules, Epic didn’t try to become a payment processor for video games from other companies. Epic only tried to sell the particular same V-Bucks it offers regarding Fortnite on PCs and game consoles. 

“Tim did not say you can come into the Epic shop and buy Clash of Clans currency or Candy Crush currency or whatever else,” Pachter added. “He had been offering Epic foreign currency.”