|
|
|
|
|
|
by xyzzy_plugh
750 days ago
|
|
|
> And any pretense that Epic is doing this for anyone other than, or in addition to, Epic went out the window during the Apple trial when Sweeney admitted on the stand that had Apple offered Epic, and only Epic, a sweetheart deal, he would’ve gladly taken it in a heartbeat. I don't observe any pretense that Epic is doing any of this _for the greater good_. Epic is correct in that what they want to see change can benefit others. Epic deserves all the money they make from digital purchases. They shouldn't have to share 30% of _every_ transaction with app stores just because the creators of those app stores force everyone to use them. It can be both. It's not wrong for Epic to support changes that also happen to benefit everyone while also prioritizing their own goals. |
|
|
No, but it’s wrong for Epic to position those changes as part of a battle to ensure everybody gets their money, and then admit on the stand that they were perfectly happy to let everybody else to continue to get screwed over as long as they (Epic) got their cash.
--
https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/30/23962920/epic-just-admit...
"The Coalition for App Fairness is an independent nonprofit organization founded by industry-leading companies to advocate for freedom of choice and fair competition across the app ecosystem."
--
https://www.imore.com/epic-games-would-have-accepted-special...
Lawyer: If Apple had told you that it would offer you a deal and no other developers, would you have accepted that?
Sweeney: Yes, I would have.