[d3nj4l]

This is a disingenuous comparison. Epic does not sell content not made by Epic in Fortnite, while Apple sells content not made by Apple in the App Store. This is like saying a branded clothing store in a mall has to sell things that aren't of its brand if it wants to complain about the mall throttling its sales.

[nodamage]

Ah, so you're saying the key difference is that Apple has allowed the sale of third party content in their product. Do you agree then, that:

1. If Apple didn't allow the sale of third party content, they would be in the same position as Epic and therefore there would be no problem?

2. If Epic allowed the sale of third party content, they should not be allowed to control what type of content is sold, nor should they be allowed to collect a percentage of each sale?

[lukeramsden]

> 2. If Epic allowed the sale of third party content, they should not be allowed to control what type of content is sold, nor should they be allowed to collect a percentage of each sale?

I don't think anyone has a problem with platforms charging _a_ percentage of each sale, just that Apple's is too high (and in the case of their dispute with Spotify, that it allows them to unfairly compete in their own marketplace)

[nodamage]

Except Epic wants to force Apple to allow third-party payments so they can entirely avoid the Apple fee.

[Razengan]

> just that Apple's is too high

How much do Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo/Steam charge?

[d3nj4l]

If Apple did not allow the sale of third party content, there wouldn't be "a cut". It's all in house products made by Apple.