Lawsuits like Epic against Apple and its App Store end up being tedious. Especially for users and fans of the brand, who see how the news is filled with news about it. However, the case under study teaches us something to which we do not risk anything (directly) in his verdict. He shows us how the decision-making process of a big company like Apple works.
Apple, crossroads and priorities
In 2015, we analyzed how Apple was dealing with a crossroads with the example of Safari. The company has a decision-making system when the situation is complex. So that you can take the most suitable path, taking into account the interests of the three parties usually involved:
When Apple is at a crossroads, it will decide based on a priority list: Apple comes first, users second, and developers last.
At the time, Safari’s lack of adoption of more web standards was criticized. Something that was attributed to the fact that Apple didn’t want fancy web apps that would harm its App Store. In reality, it is very likely that Apple’s priorities were different and that the company prefers a browser first
Developers have therefore been relegated to third place on this priority list.
What makes Apple move
When we talk about why a business makes certain decisions, the comfortable, quick and, why not, answer that fits the story of many is: he does it for money. When we talk about the biggest tech company in history, it’s easy to navigate our way to answer all the questions. The reality, however, is more complicated and requires further analysis.
We love our income, but our goal is not to make money. It might sound a little frivolous, but it’s the truth. Our goal and what drives us is to make great products. If we are successful people will appreciate it and if we are operationally competent we will make money.
These words come from the mouth of Jony Ive, spoken in an interview in 2012. The cynic would think that it is nothing more than lip service, that Apple, like any company, you are motivated by profitability and immediate money. Many companies can pursue this perfectly legitimate goal, but others like Apple (although not the only one) prefer to reverse it.
For those in Cupertino, the first thing is the product. If it’s good and it’s priced right, people will buy it. Yes if they are able to manufacture them at an acceptable cost and quality, they will have advantages
Apple’s priorities applied to the Epic case
Go ahead, I’m not an expert in antitrust law. But I have indeed witnessed similar attempts accused Apple of monopoly practices on other occasions. One of the most recent is the lawsuit that Blix filed against Apple a long time ago. If his name doesn’t sound like anything to you, it’s because the developer BlueMail did not set up a circus around him and his lawsuit was rejected at the end of 2020.
The judge ruled that saying that Apple had the power to restrict competition did not amount to proving that effectively did. That is to say, to have power is not the same as to exercise it, and in a trial, facts are judged, not hypotheses. Going back to Epic’s case against the App Store, I see we’re in a similar situation: Epic claims that Apple has the power to crush its competitors, but so far they haven’t shown that it was.
It is very difficult to prove that a platform is a monopoly when the income you generate on it is only a small fraction of the total.
In its line of defense, Apple argued that Epic Games has been very successful on and off the App Store before starting his crusade against her. It took advantage of this so-called monopoly platform for years before realizing that it was detrimental to competition. This is exactly the same thing the judge said in the Blix case.
What we are seeing with this Epic lawsuit against the App Store is, to my knowledge, a simple business conflict stem from the priorities of Apple and the interests of Epic Games. Apple comes first, then users, and finally developers. What Epic Games asks (to be able to have its own App Store in iOS) only benefits Epic Games and, in Apple’s view, attacks the control, security and privacy exercised by Apple, along with it is detrimental to the user experience. .
If Judge Gonzalez Rogers sees the case this way, it is very likely that leave conflict resolution in the hands of both companies so as not to see a case of monopoly. This week has already left a door open to deal with a possible solution, now it’s Epic and Apple’s decision to go through it.
