[pwinnski]

I listed three conditions: "[1] violated the policies and then [2] filed a lawsuit and [3] started an extensive PR campaign"

Netflix arguably did the first, but I don't recall them doing either of the other two things.

[ProAm]

Because they were not kicked from the app store for doing so.

[misnome]

Come on, I don't think anyone is pretending that this wasn't a deliberate provocation by Epic

[arcticbull]

I guess so, but so what? Deliberately provoking a potentially illegal act to litigate it is fair game. It doesn't legitimize the move by Apple, nor does it invalidate Epic's claim. If they want to play high-stakes poker, they better have good attorneys, but that's life in the American judicial system.

[misnome]

But... it does describe the difference between Netflix, which is what the thread is about?

[damnyou]

Suffering a harm is how one gets standing to sue.

[naikrovek]

Suffering harm is how one sues and wins, yes. Anyone can sue for anything and quickly lose, but to have any hope of winning, you must be harmed.

[burnte]

It was an invitation for Apple to screw up. They could have just banned the app. Instead they went full nuclear. Apple stepped in the trap.