As the legal battle between Epic Games and Apple heads to a hearing on September 28, the iPhone maker says nothing in arguing against Epic’s request for a preliminary injunction that would bring Fortnite back to the iOS App Store. In a 37-page motion filed Tuesday night, Apple says it must retain the ability to punish “one of the most egregious acts of sabotage Apple has ever seen with any developer.”
“Epic started a fire and poured gasoline on it, and is now asking the court for emergency help to put it out, even though Epic can do it on its own in an instant by simply adhering to contract terms which have profitably governed his relationship with Apple for years, “part of the motion read.” Epic is a saboteur, not a martyr. “
Apple’s argument for keeping Fortnite out of the App Store without modifications relies heavily on arguments around protecting the security of the iPhone. When Apple first created the iOS App Store, he said, “Rather than recreating the Internet, Apple instead chose to create a safe and reliable place for its iPhone customers to discover and download apps, believing that they will work seamlessly and securely with the tap of a finger. “
Epic has undermined this secure approach by violating the contractual terms of its developer agreement and inserting its own direct payments option into the iOS version of Fortnite via a “hotfix”, which Apple was unable to review before it went live. For this reason, Apple says it was unable to guarantee that Epic “had not made changes to the payment system or bypassed iPhone security features or privacy protections.” as he usually does.
As it stands, for example, FortniteThe direct payment option of (which remains available and widely used by players who have previously downloaded Fortnite for iOS) isn’t blocked by iPhone’s built-in parental control restrictions on in-app purchases. “Apple promises its customers that the App Store will be a safe and trustworthy place for customers to discover and download applications,” the company writes. “By inserting secret and unexamined functionality into an app, Epic threatens the relationship between Apple and iPhone customers.”
If Epic succeeds in their argument here, Apple cautions, nothing will stop other developers from undermining Apple’s 30% in-app purchase cut as well. “Epic insists that other developers will not follow its example because they fear ‘retaliation’,” writes Apple. “But no one will fear Apple’s response if this court grants the injunction Epic seeks and declares that all developers can flout Apple’s rules without consequence as long as they claim Apple’s rules are anti-competitive. . “
I’m still looking for Unreal Engine
Fortnite Apart from that, Apple is also arguing that it must retain the right to shut down all of Epic’s iOS developer accounts. This includes the accounts behind the development of Unreal Engine on iOS, which are currently protected by a prohibition order.
Apple says it wants to shut down all of Epic’s accounts in part to prevent what it calls a “shell set” of apps being transferred from one developer account to another. But Apple says it’s also because the company now sees Epic’s Unreal Engine as a “potential threat” that presents itself as a potential second “Trojan horse” that would allow Epic to pursue its threats to undermine it. ‘App Store and insert other unauthorized features. “
Thanks to Unreal Engine, Apple claims that Epic could “insert malware or other unauthorized features such as alternative direct payment mechanisms” into “non-Epic apps available on the App Store that are powered by Unreal Engine. … It is easy to see that a malicious application affecting the operation of a significant fraction of iPhones worldwide could significantly disrupt local or even global phone systems, as well as large segments of the Internet itself. . “
As far-fetched as these claims of global internet sabotage via the game engine may be, Apple’s main point is that it can no longer give Epic the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the security of its iPhone and iOS development contract obligations. “Apple does not wait to be duped a second time before terminating a subsidiary for the bad actions of its managers,” the company writes.
Not a monopoly?
The remainder of Apple’s motion largely repeats previous arguments that Epic is unlikely to prove its claims that Apple is a monopoly with unreasonable control over the market. The fact that Epic benefits from “alternative means of distribution Fortnite, “from consoles and PCs to Android phones”, presents[s] a classic example of services that are “reasonably interchangeable” when used “for the same purpose”, “writes Apple.
More than that, however, even on iOS, Apple says Epic has other options to monetize Fortnite without paying Apple’s 30% fee on in-app purchases. “A developer can generate income through advertising, the sale of physical goods and services, and a variety of other ways that won’t incur any commission for Apple,” the company writes, adding that more than 80% of apps in the world The Store application uses such business models.
Apple also reiterates its position, previously supported by the court, that Epic’s prejudice in this case is self-inflicted and therefore does not require a preliminary injunction to remedy it. At Epic’s alleged “damage to reputation” by being forced out of the App Store, Apple notes that “Epic has engaged in a large-scale pre-planned media blitz surrounding its decision to sever its deal with Apple, creating ad campaigns around the effort which If Epic was really worried about damaging its reputation as a result of this dispute, it would not engage in these elaborate efforts to advertise it. “