Simply if you thought issues couldn’t warmth up anymore in Epic’s battle in opposition to Apple’s alleged App Retailer dominance, the iPhone maker has now filed a countersuit in opposition to the Fortnite developer, searching for damages because of its breach of the developer settlement between the 2 firms.

As is normally the case with court docket filings in a battle like this, Apple’s attorneys are pulling no punches in stating precisely what they consider Epic’s choice to violate the phrases of its App Retailer settlement, and though it’s unclear precisely what sort of damages Apple is searching for, it’s abundantly clear that the corporate desires to make a powerful level about Epic’s culpability and its true motivations.

Though Epic portrays itself as a contemporary company Robin Hood, in actuality it’s a multi-billion greenback enterprise that merely desires to pay nothing for the great worth it derives from the App Retailer.


First reported by CNBC, Apple notes in its submitting with the District Courtroom for the Northern District of California that “Epic’s lawsuit is nothing greater than a fundamental disagreement over cash,” and that any makes an attempt by the Fortnite developer to color its battle as being for any form of larger good is disingenuous at greatest.

After all, that is already painfully apparent from lots of the court docket filings which have already preceded this; even leaving apart the hyperbolic language typically utilized by attorneys, Epic’s technique got here out just about in its personal phrases after Apple disclosed the chain of communications between Epic CEO Tim Sweeney and Apple’s government staff that truly led as much as the developer’s choice to defy Apple’s App Retailer guidelines by sneaking its personal in-app buying system into Fortnite.

Whereas Epic claims to be combating for the liberty of all builders, it’s solely doing so not directly at greatest, since its actual goal from the beginning has been to persuade — or drive — Apple to permit Epic to function its personal impartial app retailer on the iOS platform, with all the identical privileges and capabilities that Apple’s App Retailer gives.

Nevertheless, whether or not Epic’s aims are proper or not isn’t the purpose of Apple’s newest return volley. In actual fact, Apple is successfully ignoring Epic’s personal set of claims and focusing as an alternative solely on the truth that Epic selected to breach the phrases of its contract with Apple when it determined to bypass the in-app buying system by including its personal direct fee system.

‘Fee Theft’

In its newest court docket submitting, Apple notes that it was principally blindsided by Epic, which it stated had secretly been “enlisting a legion of attorneys, publicists, and technicians to orchestrate a sneak assault on the App Retailer.”

Though Epic’s CEO Tim Sweeney had already communicated to Apple’s executives that he and his firm have been “in a state of considerable disagreement,” after Apple had refused his request to arrange his personal app retailer, it’s clear that Apple by no means anticipated Sweeney nor Epic to truly take the ultimate step that they in the end did.

Shortly after 2:00 a.m. on August 13, 2020, the morning on which Epic would activate its hidden commission-theft performance, Mr. Sweeney once more emailed Apple executives, declaring that ‘Epic will not adhere to Apple’s fee processing restrictions.’


In its submitting, Apple blatantly calls out Epic’s actions as a “hidden commission-theft performance” inside Fortnite, whereas additionally mentioning the e-mail that Sweeney despatched to Apple’s government staff that very same day — an e-mail that successfully declared outright that he was going to be in breach of contract.

Whereas Sweeney declared in his e-mail that Epic can be taking this motion “within the agency perception that historical past and the legislation are on our facet,” that is in the end one thing that’s going to be up for the courts to determine. It’s been Epic’s place that it was principally compelled to signal a contract with Apple due to its market dominance, and didn’t actually have the liberty that it ought to have needed to negotiate fairer phrases. It was, in essence, a “take-it-or-leave-it” contract.

After all, such arbitrary contracts aren’t inherently unlawful. In actual fact, nearly each service supplier, from Apple to your mobile phone and fuel firm supply contracts with mounted phrases and no room for negotiation of these phrases. Epic’s place, nonetheless, is that Apple’s behaviour is anticompetitive due to the dominance it holds over the iOS platform, and that it due to this fact has no different however to kowtow to Apple’s calls for.

Apple, alternatively, continues to insist that it’s not a monopoly by any authorized definition of the time period, because it has a minority share of the general smartphone market, and that the 30 p.c fee that it fees on the App Retailer is in step with trade practices.

Epic’s flagrant disregard for its contractual commitments and different misconduct has prompted vital hurt to Apple.


In its submitting, Apple additionally insists that all the actions it took in opposition to Epic, from kicking Fortnite out of the App Retailer to terminating its developer settlement have been affordable and justifiable enterprise choices in response to the developer’s flagrant breach of its settlement, and with just one exception — Apple’s menace to ban the Unreal Engine alongside Epic’s Fortnite account — the courts have agreed so far, denying any makes an attempt by Epic to get Fortnite reinstated into the App Retailer by itself phrases, though Epic hasn’t stopped making an attempt to get a preliminary injunction on the matter.

The difficulty at hand is in the end a really sophisticated one that won’t even be in the end resolved by the present lawsuits, since fashionable know-how and the connection between computer systems, functions, builders, and app shops has created an entire new authorized quagmire for lawmakers and regulators to attempt to type out, and regardless of the comparisons that many are drawing to issues like retail shops and manufacturing chains, there’s actually no analogy that may be immediately utilized right here.

The underside line is that it will possible take years to come back to any form of decision, however not less than the present combat between Apple and Epic is significantly extra entertaining than the standard patent disputes, and there’s undoubtedly much more at stake in the long term, even when the present combat is simply two multi-billion firms duking it out over who will get a much bigger piece of the pie.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here