Epic v. Apple keeps coming back to the gap between ignorance and inconvenience

Epic v. Apple keeps coming back to the gap between ignorance and inconvenience


Photo by Vjeran Pavic / The Verge

Last week, the judge in Epic v. Apple asked whether Epic really had an antitrust case against Apple, or whether it just wanted to help kids make impulse purchases. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers was talking about the importance of where and howpeople pay for their apps, and today she continued that line of questioning to the point of suggesting a kind of App Store policy change that Epic never originally put on the table.

Epic sued Apple for banning Fortnite from iOS over a direct payment system for V-Bucks, Fortnite’s in-game currency. Epic called that unfair and monopolistic. But Apple argued that it lets developers sell in-app purchases through its Safari browser, even at a discounted price — so there’s no lockout. And while Epic…

Continue reading…

Source:

This post was originally created on this site & curated for Mamizi members