Twitter | Search | |
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
To paraphrase, Apple's case re: Unreal Engine is that Epic is sockpuppeting, Epic's case is that Unreal Engine is from a completely different dev account and this is retaliation for Epic did with Fortnite.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Doren says that Epic's conduct "would spread like a virus" if Apple is forced to maintain Unreal Engine.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Veronica Lewis of Gibson Dunn attempts to chime in, and gets very firmly admonished by YGR for "tag teaming."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Forrest: We're not saying SARL is not affiliated with Epic Games. What we're saying is they've reached out beyond the contracts and the accounts..... where the in-app purchasing conflict occurred. ... These are independent contracts. This is purely a pressure tactic.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Forrest on what happens without a TRO: "The Unreal Engine will be destroyed... app developers need the ability for their app to be deployed on multiple platforms."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Forrest: "If Epic cannot offer that with the Unreal Engine, the Unreal Engine will cease to exist. ... Developers are fleeing the Unreal Engine now."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Forrest was talking public interest factors about Unreal Engine and then managed to get YGR to let her slide in sideways and talk about the public interest with respect to Fortnite. "Their social groups are going to be unable to communicate with each other," she says.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Brings the pandemic into it. "These kinds of social interactions become incredibly important."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Doren: Let me take it back to first principles. All Epic needs to do is to put a compliant version of Fortnite back on the App Store. Says that's all they need to do so that consumers can, and I quote quite literally, "ride their sharks and buy their dances on Fortnite."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: You must concede that the revocation of the engine will negatively impact third parties. Doren: It's self-inflicted — not self-inflicted, I mean it's manufactured by —
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong
YGR: *mutes him on Zoom* I get to mute you. I get to interrupt you. I asked you a simple question: yes or no?
Reply Retweet Like More
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Doren now has to unmute himself to respond. YGR keeps pressing him to answer yes or no. Doren keeps talking around it like, "That's why Epic should cure its breach, yes."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Expensive lawyering is a beautiful thing to witness
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: First of all, we're talking about a company worth billions, versus a company worth trillions. What I don't know, when you talk about devastation of a company, how much does the game aspect account for profits or market value, versus all of these other things Epic Games has?
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR reiterates that she's inclined to grant a TRO with respect to Unreal Engines, but not for Fortnite. Forrest says it's all part of the same "integrated" retaliatory package. (This strikes me as unconvincing).
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Forrest says there is no security issue with what Epic wants to do. "What we know is that Apple would not be paid what it wants to be paid."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Doren: I think it's important to state the obvious, which is that the nature of the breach here is to assure that Epic be paid. It's not so Apple could be paid, it's so Epic could be paid without commission to Apple.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Doren: Most of Epic's business has nothing to do with iOS. The iOS platform is about 12% of their revenue.. most of their platforms are elsewhere... Epic only went mobile in 2018 and they did so on Android and iOS.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Doren describes the hotfix as: "slip something in through the backdoor and trigger it two weeks later in the dark of night" Doren quotes a Sweeney email about Epic being in conflict with Apple "on many fronts" for many years.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR says "OK, yes, I've read that email. And other emails." YGR: There appears to be an interesting battle here. There appears to be some measure of lack of competition. And high barriers to market entry.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: There also appears to be evidence that everyone who is using these platforms to sell these kinds of games is charging 30%. Whether or not Epic likes it, the industry, and not just Apple, seems to be charging that.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: Epic itself charges third parties... Doren: 12%, your honor. YGR: 12%.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: The battle won't be won or lost on a TRO and it won't be won or lost on a preliminary injunction. Apple has a reputation of going the distance.... they acted the way they did here, but I think it was an overreach.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: I don't think a weekend of briefing on a TRO really does justice to the antitrust issues that are at issue in this case. Says therefore the merits don't play as much of a role in the TRO decision.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
jfdklafds Gary Bornstein for Epic starts off by apologizing for any noise coming from his connection that might have been construed as an interruption. He's been muted like this entire time, he's JUST shading his opposite number for interrupting earlier
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Bornstein says that if Apple's App Store is so high quality and so secure, then they should compete. "They've given them no choice of store, they've given them no choice of processor."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Bornstein makes a shoutout to Judge Alsup specifically in Psystar v. Apple
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Epic is really eager to get into the facts of whether or not Apple is a monopolist, and Apple is not, aside from general terms about how Apple is totally competitive if you get into the details (which they cannot get into, at this moment, right now)
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
The hearing started out with YGR asking when each side was going to be ready to go to trial — Epic said 4-6 mos, Apple said approx 10 mos. Apple is leaning on this to avoid talking about their monopoly.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: If you have an iPhone you can't buy it [an app] from anyone else. You can't buy it from Google. You can't buy it from Amazon. So without competition, where is that 30% coming from? Why isn't it 10% or 15%? How is the consumer benefiting at all?
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR: There are plenty of economic theories about the cost of people to switch, whether the platform is Android or iOS. Doren insists that people "switch all the time" and they'll be able to prove it at a later stage. Again, hand-waving in order to avoid talking about monopoly
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Bornstein says that they're reaching into "subsequent transactions" — like Expedia taking a cut of your room service order at the hotel you booked through them.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
They're all using Best Buy as an example and YGR laughs and says it's not the best example anymore because even though Best Buy has a storefront, Apple owns its section and pays Best Buy, "for labor, I guess?" Says, "people should really investigate how Best Buy actually works."
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR says she will issue the order quickly, then asks for wrap-up comments.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Forrest's last comments are to (1) embrace Epic's role as a "private attorney-general," (2) once again reiterate that the hotfix is not "secret code," (3) apologize for not briefing the unclean hands antitrust cases prior to the hearing
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
YGR passes on having the antirust cases briefed now, and says she can address it in the next round (I believe the "next round" refers to the preliminary injunction).
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Doren: Mr. Sweeney intended to fight Apple for years, to get his way. This is not a fight that Apple picked.
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Did YGR just pull out a planner
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Forrest asks that the deadline be Sept 8, instead of Sept 7, since it's Labor Day. YGR, "As you're aware, ECF is open 24 hours a day" 😭 but lets them off anyways
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Yeah this is the best snap filter that I am not allowed to take a screencap of
Reply Retweet Like
sarah jeong Aug 24
Replying to @sarahjeong
Preliminary injunction hearing will be Sept 28. Written order on TRO is coming "shortly." Hearing is adjourned.
Reply Retweet Like