![]() “Epic’s opening slides had no mention of output or prices, no mention of consumer experience, no mention of the law under which it has the burden, and no mention of its own lead economist, Dr. In March, a judge granted Apple’s motion for a 14-hour deposition of Evans, whose 653-page report on the case covers nearly every disputed economic issue in this lawsuit. Epic’s lead expert economist, David Evans, chairman of the Global Economics Group, is expected to explain how “distributing its apps through the App Store” caused Epic to pay “supra-competitive commissions and been deprived of the benefits that would flow from a competitive market.”Īpple has been especially mindful of Evans. Read more: Why cloud gaming became a hot topic at landmark antitrust trialĪnd the strongest witness for Epic is yet to come. In an infamous 2010 email, the late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs expressed his desire to “tie all of our products together, so we further lock customers into our ecosystem.” Officials on Apple’s prohibitive policies toward competing cloud-gaming platforms, and compelling email in which Apple executives discussed market dominance. In what many are increasingly calling the internet’s trial, Epic has scored with the testimony of Microsoft Corp. ![]() ![]() The longer-term strategy for Epic, he said, is to “get some form of long-term regulation” on commissions demanded by digital platforms. To win the case based on what Epic has presented. “This is about lining up other participants in the ecosystem against Apple, to upset consumers, and force Washington to enact legislation.”įlorian Ederer, an associate professor of economics at Yale School of Management, lauded Epic’s legal team but expects Apple They haven’t shown the practices they are complaining about are harming consumers,” Larry Downes, project director at the Georgetown’s Center for Business and Public Policy’s Evolution of Regulation and Innovation project. Apple also noted in its filing with the Supreme Court that Epic hasn't had any apps in Apple's App Store since it banned the company in 2020 for violating its IAP rules.“From a legal standpoint, they have established nothing in terms of antitrust. Additionally, Apple said Epic isn't able to show it will be "seriously and irreparably injured" by the IAP rule being stayed, as it's already the way things are. In its arguments to the Supreme Court, Epic argued that Apple was only seeking to delay implementation of the decision, that the 9th Circuit applied improper law when making its decision to stay the IAP order and that the court was too lenient in its application of the law used to make its decision.Īpple, on the other hand, said that the 9th Circuit's application of the law was appropriate because the stay will expire if Apple's eventual appeal to the Supreme Court is denied. Hands up who ISN'T piling in to help Epic Games appeal Apple App Store ruling.Apple finds way to squeeze social network apps until pips squeak.Appeals court backs Apple over Epic, which isn't as bad as you might think.Apple owes Brit iOS app devs millions from excessively high commission, lawsuit claims.Justice Elena Kagan, who handles emergency appeals from the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit, denied the emergency application without comment. As is often the case when an appeal is filed, the 9th Circuit stayed its decision so Apple could work on its request, which led to Epic's emergency request. Unhappy with the appeals court decision, Apple said last month that it intended to appeal to the Supreme Court.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |