Ultimate week Epic Video games sued Apple after Fortnite used to be got rid of from the iOS App Retailer, an motion Apple took after Epic launched an replace that allowed Fortnite gamers to circumvent Apple’s in-app buying gadget to shop for V-Dollars. Apple did not prevent at pulling Fortnite, although: It additionally knowledgeable Epic that on account of its movements, all of Epic’s developer accounts and get right of entry to to iOS and Mac construction gear could be terminated on August 28. Yikes.
Epic temporarily sought a short lived restraining order fighting Apple from taking those steps, announcing it will have have a “devastating” have an effect on at the corporate, which surely turns out believeable. Nowadays Apple filed its opposition to that TRO request, announcing that Epic’s issues are completely of its personal making—and that they would leave in an instant if Epic would merely roll again the violating replace.
“Epic’s agreements with Apple expressly spell out that if an app developer violates the foundations of the App Retailer or the license for construction gear—either one of which observe and are enforced similarly to all builders huge and small—Apple will prevent operating with that developer. Builders who paintings to mislead Apple, as Epic has finished right here, are terminated,” the filing says (via MSNBC).
“So when Epic willfully and knowingly breached its agreements by secretly installing a ‘hotfix’ into its app to bypass Apple’s payment system and App Review Process, it knew full well what would happen and, in so doing, has knowingly and purposefully created the harm to game players and developers it now asks the Court to step in and remedy.”
Apple also noted that temporary restraining orders “exist to remedy irreparable harm, not easily reparable self-inflicted wounds,” adding that Epic could have avoided suffering any damage at all if it had filed its lawsuit without breaching its agreements. In fact, that’s apparently still an option.
“All of that alleged injury for which Epic improperly seeks emergency relief could disappear tomorrow if Epic cured its breach,” the filing states. “Apple has offered Epic the opportunity to cure, to go back to the status quo before Epic installed its ‘hotfix’ that turned into its hot mess, and to be welcomed back into the App Store.”
“All of this can happen without any intervention of the Court or expenditure of judicial resources. And Epic would be free to pursue its primary lawsuit. But Epic does not want to remedy the harm that it contends requires immediate relief because it has a different goal in mind: it wants the Court to allow it to free ride on Apple’s innovation, intellectual property and user trust.”
Apple’s opposition to the request for a restraining order also rejects Epic’s broader allegations, including that Apple operates as a monopoly, that in-app purchases are a separate product, and that its case has a high likelihood of success on its merits. But the crux of the argument is clearly that Epic caused all of this to happen, and it can’t reasonably expect the courts to clean up that mess.
“At the outset, equity does not favor Epic because it has unclean hands,” the filing says. “Epic has undeniably breached its agreement with Apple, and a party breaching a contract, as Epic here, has no standing to seek equitable relief.”
Interestingly, the same day that Epic filed its initial lawsuit against Apple, Epic founder and CEO Tim Sweeney said on Twitter that the studio was not seeking a special deal with Fortnite, but was in fact “fighting for open platforms and policy changes equally benefiting all developers.”
In a declaration made in support of Apple’s opposition, however, Apple senior vice president of worldwide marketing Philip W. Schiller said that’s not actually the case.
Today, Apple said Epic is seeking a special deal, but that’s not true. We’re fighting for open platforms and policy changes equally benefiting all developers. And it’ll be a hell of a fight! https://t.co/R5A48InGTgAugust 14, 2020
“On June 30, 2020, Epic’s CEO Tim Sweeney wrote my colleagues and me an electronic mail inquiring for a ‘aspect letter’ from Apple that will create a unique deal for simplest Epic that will basically exchange the best way by which Epic provides apps on Apple’s iOS platform, which is the working gadget that runs Apple’s iPhones and iPads, and allow Epic to earn more money at Apple’s expense,” Schiller mentioned.
Schiller mentioned Sweeney despatched a 2nd electronic mail on July 17, indicating “that he used to be nonetheless pursuing a unique deal for Epic,” after which a 3rd, at round 2 am on August 13, stating that “Epic will now not adhere to Apple’s cost processing restrictions.”
In a reaction to Schiller’s declaration, Sweeney mentioned on Twitter that the observation is “deceptive,” noting that whilst he sought acclaim for Epic to circumvent the App Retailer cost gadget, he additionally expressed “hope that Apple may also make those choices similarly to be had to all iOS builders.”
Apple’s observation is deceptive. You’ll be able to learn my electronic mail in Apple’s submitting, which is publicly to be had. I in particular mentioned in Epic’s request to the Apple professionals, “We are hoping that Apple may also make those choices similarly to be had to all iOS builders…” https://t.co/yRio08fPSy percent.twitter.com/HsqjApFQeoAugust 21, 2020
Schiller alluded to that time in his declaration, however mentioned it used to be a part of the rationale that Apple is unwilling to accede to Epic’s calls for: “Additionally, what Mr. Sweeney requested for must observe no longer simplest to Epic however, in accordance with the philosophy of our App Retailer, to all builders; this is able to have a catastrophic impact at the person revel in and Apple’s industry fashion.”
Epic took every other public shot at Apple previous as of late, pronouncing a #FreeFortnite match with prizes together with the “Tart Rich person” pores and skin—the sinister apple guy from its 1984 parody video—and a “dad hat” with an Apple-style llama emblem. Epic may be recently embroiled in a identical lawsuit with Google over the Android Play Retailer.