In a new court filing, Epic Games has challenged Apple’s stance that third-party app stores compromise iPhone security. Using Apple’s macOS as an example, the gaming company pointed out that the process of “sideloading” apps — that is, installing apps outside of Apple’s own App Store — is not necessarily the threat Apple describes.
Epic points out that Apple’s Macs don’t have the kind of restrictions found in iOS, the iPhone’s operating system, but Apple touts macOS, the operating system used in Macs, as very secure. The Cary, North Carolina-based developer of Fortnite made these and other points in its latest briefing about its ongoing legal battle with Apple over its control of the App Store.
Epic Games wants to gain the rights to offer Fortnite to iPhone users outside the App Store, or at least be able to use its own payment processing system, so it can no longer pay Apple Pay a commission for the ability to offer the software to iPhone users.
Last September, a California judge ruled in Epic Games v. Apple for the district court that Apple did not have a monopoly on the relevant market — digital mobile gaming deals. But the court ruled that Apple cannot prohibit developers from adding links to alternative payments in their apps that point to alternative payment methods outside of Apple’s App Store-based monetization system. While Apple largely touted the ruling as a victory, both sides have appealed the ruling, as Epic Games wants to win the right to distribute apps through its own play store again, and Apple doesn’t want developers to be able to create apps for them. Its users propose other payment methods.
On Wednesday, local time, after Apple appealed the district court ruling, Epic filed its Answer of Appeal and Cross-Appeal.
The game maker noted in new filings that lower courts have been led by Apple on a number of issues and reached wrong conclusions. Many of its recommendations relate to how district courts interpret the law. In addition, it newly points to key allies Epic now has – Microsoft, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and attorneys general for 34 states and the District of Columbia, all of whom have filed in favor of Epic with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Briefing of the case.
One of Epic’s larger points, however, has to do with Mac’s Safe Mode and how it differs from the iPhone. So, if Apple can allow side-by-side on Mac devices and still say those computers are safe, it can certainly do the same with iPhones.
“With macOS, Apple relies on the security measures imposed by the operating system, not the App Store, and the ‘notarization’ process that scans apps and returns them to developers for distribution,” Epic wrote in the new filing.
Epic then pointed to Apple’s own marketing example of the security of its Macs, which it says can be installed without hassle from “apps from the App Store and the Internet.”
And Apple is against adopting the same model on the iPhone because it would require a redesign of the way its software works, including what it says reduces security for end-users.
Apple has been sounding the alarm about being forced to open up iPhones to third-party app stores as app store legislation targeting tech giants continues to advance in Congress. Apple said that forcing sideloading is not in line with its rules to support consumer privacy protections.
In a document published by Apple further detailing the issue, it said allowing sideloading could jeopardize users’ most sensitive and private information.
“Supporting sideloading through direct downloads and third-party app stores would weaken the privacy and security protections that make the iPhone so secure and expose users to serious security risks,” the document reads. Apple also noted that Google’s Android operating system is An example of this risk, it noted that over the past four years, Android devices were found to be 15 to 47 times more likely to be infected with malware than iPhones.
In an interview with the Financial Times that coincided with the release of the new filing, Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney went on to slam Apple’s alleged anti-competitive behavior. Sweeney said that even if Apple won the hardware market fairly, it shouldn’t be allowed to use that position to gain an unfair advantage over competitors and other markets.