Epic Games and Apple have been engaged in a long-standing battle over Apple’s revenue-sharing policies within the App Store. While Epic’s previous antitrust lawsuit against Apple was not successful, their concerns were echoed in a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice and 17 state attorneys general. This indicates that the issues raised by Epic are not isolated incidents but rather reflect broader concerns within the industry.
In Europe, the Digital Markets Act has seemingly provided Epic with an opportunity to launch its own Epic Games Store on iOS. This move would allow Epic to bring Fortnite back to the platform with reduced commissions to Apple. However, Apple has rejected the games store on two occasions, citing similarities between the store and its own App Store, specifically regarding the “install” and “in-app purchase” buttons.
Epic publicly voiced its frustrations about Apple’s rejections, calling them “arbitrary” and “obstructive.” They reported their concerns to European regulators, which eventually led to Apple approving the games store. However, Apple still demanded that Epic make changes in a future update.
The situation took another turn when Epic posted that they were “disputing” Apple’s decision. Tim Sweeney, founder and CEO of Epic Games, expressed his frustration with Apple’s demand to change the buttons in the next version of the game store, which would make it less user-friendly. Sweeney stated that Epic would continue to fight against these demands.
This latest development suggests that the dispute between Epic Games and Apple is far from over. It remains to be seen whether Epic will hold firm and resist making further changes to its game store. Apple’s response to Epic’s resistance will also be an important factor in determining the outcome of this ongoing battle.
Overall, this ongoing dispute sheds light on the complex relationship between app developers and platforms like Apple. It highlights the need for transparent and fair practices that benefit both parties involved. The outcome of this battle will likely have implications for the wider app development industry and may set a precedent for future disputes.
