🍏 The end of Apple and Epic…for now
Apple and Epic have finished their trial over whether Apple exerts too much control over the App Store. As The Verge notes, it “was bookended by Tims” -- Sweeney for Epic and Cook for Apple. After three weeks of testimony, here are a few key details that stand out:
Cook admitted video games like Epic drive their App Store revenues: He said in-app purchases in video games, of which Apple gets a 30% cut, make a majority of Apple’s App Store revenue. In a potentially bad sign for Apple, judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers responded, “The gaming industry seems to be generating a disproportionate amount of money relative to the IP that you are giving them and everybody else. In a sense, it's almost as if they're subsidizing everybody else.”
Cook also made the key point Apple has been making throughout the trial -- that Apple exerts full control over the App Store for security purposes.
But we’re not talking about only “games”: Using the descriptor video game to describe Epic didn’t make it too far in court. After Apple said it wanted to narrow the scope of arguments to games -- rather than any entity in the app -- Epic countered that it was a “metaverse, a social place.”
So apparently there’s no legal agreement on what constitutes a video game.
The potential flaw in Epic’s argument: During the debate-style closing arguments, the judge brought up an interesting point regarding Epic’s stance that it should be able to sell in-game purchases without Apple getting a cut. She said, Epic “is attacking the fundamental way in which Apple is generating revenue.”
A long time coming: It could take several weeks and potentially months before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers makes a ruling.