Archive for the ‘Epic Games’ Category

The Verdict In Apple Case Is More Complicated Than You Think

September 27, 2021

The recent Epic v. Apple decision might seem like a win for Apple, says Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a partner at Arnall Golden Gregory LLP and an antitrust expert. The ruling, however, is a bit more complicated.
Despite Apple’s victory and Epic’s appeal, Jacobovitz told Sports Business Journal that this ruling benefits both sides.
Epic filed the antitrust suit to help fellow developers that are forced to use Apple’s in-app payment system and pay a 30% commission per transaction, but the move was actually motivated by Fortnite’s removal.
Apple eventually won a counterclaim from Epic that will cost the company millions if it doesn’t win on appeal: “The award of approximately $4M relates to Apple’s counterclaim against Epic for breach of contract and other claims (p. 168 of the decision).” The judgment ordered Epic to pay 30% of the $12M in revenue Epic Games collected from the Fortnite app on iOS through Epic Direct Payment. Frequently, antitrust cases involve litigating counterclaims as well.”
Jacobovitz added that companies suing big tech will face a tough fight: “What companies find is that if you’re using high tech, you’re in for a battle.” Companies won’t just roll over and settle right away.
A second takeaway is that Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers held that Apple did not engage in antitrust behavior, even though it holds a monopoly in a particular sector. She found that Epic had failed to prove that Apple had engaged in antitrust behavior.
According to the judge, Apple was not a monopolist despite having a market share of over 55%. The implication is that it has market power, but it is not a monopoly,” he added. “The other issue is that Apple was ordered to allow other payment options; the judge ruled that Apple cannot force developers to use in-app purchases.”
Rogers also noted that Epic’s definition of Apple’s market power was rejected, an important step towards proving the company’s antitrust violations.
Judge Jacobovitz ruled that the product market is digital mobile gaming transactions, which is different from what Epic wanted to define as a market. Antitrust economists work for both sides in antitrust cases. “One defines market power very narrowly, while the other defines it very broadly.”
Although Epic should be commended for allowing app developers to sell content outside of Apple’s App Store payment system (such as through in-app links and direct communication with users), it will likely come back to haunt it during its current battle with Google.
He said the case illustrates plaintiffs are unable to show they have so much dominance in the market that judges are holding them accountable in terms of proving monopoly power or market power, and that it is illegal to maintain a monopoly in an anti-competitive manner.
Note: prior to its publication, it was revealed that Apple will not even consider reinstating Fortnite to the App Store for iOS devices until all appeals related to the antitrust case and Epic’s separate judgment for breach of contract are exhausted. Appeals could take anywhere from one to five years to resolve.

Judge Issues An Injunction In Apple V. Epic Games That Allows Developers To Do What They Want

September 13, 2021

Despite a judge’s refusal to call Apple a monopoly in a case brought by Epic Games, the giant tech company did receive an injunction related to its App Store, according to SBJ’s James Fudge.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled in favor of Apple on nine of ten counts brought forward by Epic, the developer of Fortnite. The company has 90 days to comply with the order, though it is likely to appeal.
In opposition to Epic, Rogers agreed that Apple’s implementation of “anti-steering policies,” which prohibit developers from contacting consumers directly or placing links in-app that direct consumers away from the store’s purchasing system, was heavy-handed and anti-competitive.
After Epic introduced a direct link to buy in-app currency directly from the developer, Apple and Epic filed a lawsuit in 2020. Apple and Epic Games pulled Fortnite from the App Store. Epic, from Apple’s perspective, wanted to avoid paying 15-30% commission on in-app purchases, while Apple saw it as an additional option to consumers’ direct purchases within Apple’s ecosystem.
Epic is suing Google, which took similar action against its game, in federal court. As of this writing, Epic has not announced when or if Fortnite will return to iOS devices.

Game Bits: Dying Light 2 Episode 2 Streams On July 1, 2021, NIS America Has Announced Trailers For Many Games Are Coming Out Soon

June 26, 2021

New Episode of Dying Light 2 Coming July 1, 2021

The second episode of Techland’s Dying Light 2 showcase, “Dying 2 Know”, will be streamed live on July 1, 2021. The stream is expected to last for 30 minutes.

The second episode of Dying 2 Know will focus on the infected enemies you will encounter in the game, according to a Techland press release. We need supplies to restore the remnants of hope in the hearts of the few loved ones we have and to build our lives on the rooftops, but before you hit the streets, you need to know what’s hiding in the darkness.”.
“The reward is high, but the price you will pay if you stay in the dark for too long will be even higher.”

View the first episode of Dying 2 Know to see what to expect from the upcoming showcase on July 1, 2021.

Leak From Epic Games Store Leads To NIS America Announcing Game Trailers

In response to the big leak from the Epic Games Store recently, NIS America has officially announced localizations for The Legend of Heroes: Trails from Zero, The Legend of Heroes: Trails into Reverie, and The Legend of Nayuta: Boundless Trails.

Trails from Zero is due for release in Fall 2022, and Azure and Zero are set for release in 2023. The official website for Zero and Azure lists Steam and GOG as PC platforms. Oddly, Epic is not listed despite store pages already being online.

There is an official website for Trails into Reverie here, and an official website for The Legend of Nayuta: Boundless Trails here, both showing Steam and GOG.

In addition to the recent fan translations for Trails from Zero and Trails to Azure, Geofront announced that they will be working with NIS America on the official published release of the two games. A lengthy blog post from the translation team can be found on the Geofront blog.

The Head of Apple Software Engineering Testifies in Apple V. Epic Games Trial

May 24, 2021

Craig Federighi, Apple’s software engineering head, recently testified in court, explaining the key differences between the iPhone and Mac operating systems.

Third-party software can also be downloaded from the MacOS App Store. However, iOS systems have never allowed third-party downloads.

Epic’s key argument in this trial is that Apple’s behavior can be considered anti-competitive and monopolistic by not allowing third-party app downloads or stores.

Despite the fact that there have always been a greater number of iPhone users than Mac users, Federighi stated that there are still a lot of iPhone users. Considering this, he said the iPhone is likely to suffer more malware attacks.

Macs are less than a tenth as common as iOS devices, so from an attacker’s perspective, iOS is a much more attractive market to attack.

As well, he argued that iPhone users are much more casual than Mac users, and are more likely to download malicious software without realizing it.

Federighi explained that iOS users have just become accustomed to getting apps all the time, quoting Apple’s famous slogan: “There’s an app for that.”

Federighi also discussed the sensitivity of data and the casual nature of iPhone users. Mobile devices are designed to be carried wherever a user goes in addition to carrying the user’s most sensitive information — contacts, photos, documents, bank details, and even their location.

“Iphones are very attractive targets,” he said.

You have them all the time, and they have some of your most personal information — of course, your contact info, your photos, but also other things.”

An attacker can gain access or control of any of these devices for a great deal of money from all of these factors.

Last but not least, Federighi suggested that iPhone and Mac are designed for completely different audiences — the latter being far more technologically literate.

Mac computers are marketed as specialist devices for professionals who understand how to download software safely. However, iPhones are marketed towards those that might not know how to protect themselves from malicious attacks, such as children.

The Mac has been part of this generation of systems where the expectation is you can get software wherever — you can give it to your friend and he’ll run it, that is part of the expectation. But Mac users also expect a degree of flexibility that helps them accomplish their goals. to what they do. Some of them are software developers, some of them are pros running their unique tools, and having that power is part of it,” Federighi said.

It’s as if the Mac is a car — you can drive it anywhere and off-road if you want. It comes with being a driver, you’ve got to be trained, there’s a certain level of responsibility, but that’s what you bought. Your goal was to buy a car.
“With iOS, we were able to create something that kids — heck, even infants — could operate and be safe doing so. That’s a real game-changer.”

Dou you enjoy playing games? You can play with EagleFly at Twitch.TV and Facebook Live.

My email is tomtardis@yahoo.com