According to the reports, two expert witnesses stated in the Epic Games v. Apple case that Apple’s App Store’s anti-steering provisions make it difficult for iPhone users to know that they can use certain devices on other devices.
Economist David Evans explained why Apple has an unfair monopoly in the distribution of iOS applications. He also pointed out some measures to prevent developers from advertising on external platforms and websites of the App Store.
Evans took the in-game currency V-Bucks of “Fortnite” as an example. He said that “Fortnite” players can theoretically purchase V-Bucks through a web browser, not necessarily through the iOS app. “The problem here is that on the one hand, Epic is required to use in-app purchases in the iOS app “Fortnite”, and on the other hand, a series of obstacles have been set up… This makes it more difficult for Epic to communicate with iOS app users. ”
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers then asked whether removing these reversal regulations would alleviate the problem. Evans responded that this solution is “temporarily” feasible because it will weaken Apple’s so-called market power but cannot eliminate it. In addition, he added that this solution is not suitable for applications that do not have a website or web version, and it is not suitable for consumers who have difficulty using computers.
Join Our Apple Channel On Telegram
Apple’s lawyers suggested that Epic Games can buy ads to let players know that they can buy V-Bucks outside of the App Store. This means that platform owners should not be required to promote behaviors that consumers can use as a competitive activity. Another Epic witness, Susan Athey, a professor of economics at Stanford University, also mentioned the reversal rule in his testimony on Tuesday.
Athey stated that consumers cannot pass the iPhone to judge whether they can find the app on other devices or platforms by viewing the app. On the other hand, she also pointed out that subscriptions made through the Apple platform are trapped in Apple’s ecosystem. Athey pointed out that one solution is “middleware”, which is an alternative payment platform or cross-platform app store system on iOS.
Apple’s lawyers refuted these claims. They pointed out that in Athey’s example, she didn’t really analyze how much users would spend on repeat purchases of apps or subscriptions. Athey agrees with this. In addition, Apple also questioned Athey’s relationship with Microsoft and the fact that she did not have access to key App Store-related business documents before providing testimony against the store.
If you like our news and you want to see such news even further, then follow RealMi Central on Telegram (RealMi Central, Xiaomi, Apple, Realme, Samsung, Microsoft, OnePlus, Huawei/Honor, Android 12), Twitter, Facebook (Page) (Group) & Instagram.