Hacker News Reader

Comment by dgellow | Hacker News Reader

The headline feels incorrect. From what I remember Epic v Apple was a split decision where both Epic and Apple got some ruling in their favour.

Wikipedia seems to agree:

> Rogers did rule against Apple on the final charge related to anti-steering provisions, and issued a permanent injunction that, in 90 days from the ruling, blocked Apple from preventing developers from linking app users to other storefronts from within apps to complete purchases or from collecting information within an app, such as an email, to notify users of these storefronts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games_v._Apple#Decision

The didn't get everything they wanted but that's a big win.

View on HN

I'm not sure, short of quoting the entire article you just linked, how to convince you how badly Epic lost that argument. Epic lost nine counts and winning the tenth count forced Apple to do something they were already doing, except slightly faster. Apple had already lost Cameron v. Apple legally requiring them to stop anti-steering provisions.

That feels like a consolation prize more than anything. Epic still isn't a position where they want to put Fortnite back on iOS in any capacity, which I think tells you exactly how they feel about the outcome of the trial.

Yes. Authors Guild v Google also comes to mind, in a narrow technical sense Google won the last case but Authors Guild got everything it wanted in a settlement and Google couldn’t do any of what it actually wanted to do. Odds are Apple will be forced to reduce fees on alternative payment methods as litigation continues.

Clearly they are in violation of California law. And anyway, Google could momentarily pause GPS payments for freemium games, for 24h, nothing bad would happen to anyone, and in that time Apple suddenly becomes a “monopoly” in the definition of the market that Gonzalez made, and then lose in all counts, which should make clear to you what an absolute garbage decision it is.

Your overall point makes sense, but the law doesn't work the way programmers think. Nobody will say "yep, yep, according to these words, with Google paused for a day, Apple is a monopoly now." Instead, lawyers and judges have this tendency to say "well, okay, but that's not what they really meant" and just move on, ignoring what's merely technically true.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com