Techloaded247Techloaded247
  • Home
  • Tech
  • Mobiles
    • My Gadgets
    • Gaming
  • Contact Us
  • Tech Jobs
    • TECH JOBS IN NIGERIA
    • TECH JOBS IN U.S.A
    • TECH JOBS IN CANADA
    • TECH JOBS IN INDIA
  • ABOUT US
Facebook Twitter Instagram
Facebook Twitter Instagram
Techloaded247Techloaded247
  • Home
  • Tech

    Dell XPS 15 i7 11th Gen Intel – Touchscreen Laptop

    How to Create Block Quote in Google Docs

    Best Cheap Cloud Hosting Server 2023

    How to Fix Stuck on Meta Quest Logo Screen? (SOLVED)

    What is Smart Energy?

  • Mobiles
    1. My Gadgets
    2. Gaming
    3. View All

    How to sell Apple HomePod

    Fan Favorite Disney Apple Watch Bands You’ll Love

    Samsung Smart Tag Wallet: Overview

    Galaxy Watch 4 42mm vs 46mm – The Right Size For You?

    Games like Uncharted For Xbox: Adventure and Treasure

    How To Fix Sprint Bug in Dead Space Remake

    Dead Space Remake Review: What’s New

    Revealing Rise of the Ronin, a new action-RPG

    iPhone 15 Pro — Everything We Know So Far

    Fitbit Sense 2 vs Fitbit Sense: Full Comparison

    Google Pixel 7 Vs. iPhone 14 Plus: Full Comparison

    Fixing Iphone That Won’t Charge: Easy Steps

  • Contact Us
  • Tech Jobs
    • TECH JOBS IN NIGERIA
    • TECH JOBS IN U.S.A
    • TECH JOBS IN CANADA
    • TECH JOBS IN INDIA
  • ABOUT US
Techloaded247Techloaded247
Home » Apple is appealing the Epic Games ruling it originally called a ‘resounding victory’
My Gadgets

Apple is appealing the Epic Games ruling it originally called a ‘resounding victory’

Even though Apple largely won Epic v. Apple, it’s appealing
Techloaded247 TeamBy Techloaded247 TeamUpdated:October 9, 2021No Comments2 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Apple is appealing the Epic Games ruling it originally called a ‘resounding victory’
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

Apple has filed an appeal of the verdict in its landmark trial against Epic, with potentially billions of dollars and some control over the App Store at stake. While Apple won the case largely (the company went so far as to call the ruling a “resounding victory”), with Judge Gonzalez Rogers ruling in favor of Apple in nine of the ten claims Epic brought against the company, the company did lose in one important way: the judge found that Apple violated California’s anti-steering rules, and demanded that Apple allow developers to link to outside payment systems. That policy would have taken effect in December, but it may be extended beyond that date – and that appears to be the point.

As part of the appeal, Apple is asking for a stay to prevent the company from having to implement the new anti-steering rules, arguing that it “will allow Apple to protect consumers and safeguard its platform while the company works through the complex and rapidly evolving legal, technological, and economic issues.” And the company’s arguments there are pretty revealing if we’re reading the document right.

For example, Apple claims that the new anti-steering rule is unnecessary because the company agreed to delete the offending section of its App Store Guidelines in the Cameron v. Apple settlement, but that’s not true: at the time, Apple only agreed to “clarify” that app developers could communicate with consenting customers but not link to outside payment systems. That clarification was often regarded as a red herring by developers. At the time, Apple made no mention of completely removing a section of its App Store Guidelines.

It also appears that, contrary to what some Apple pundits have said, Apple is actually concerned that the court ruling will force them to open up the App Store to rival payment systems. A button might, in fact, be a button:

Links and buttons to alternate payment mechanisms are fraught with risk. Users who click on a payment link embedded in an app—particularly one distributed through the curated App Store—will expect to be led to a webpage where they can securely provide their payment information, email address, or other personal information.

Apple goes on to argue that if it were forced to allow app developers to link to external payment systems, it wouldn’t be able to protect users from fraud:

While Apple could examine the links in the version of the app submitted for review, there is nothing stopping a developer from changing the landing point for that link or altering the content of the destination webpage. Additionally, Apple currently has no ability to determine whether a user who clicks on an external link actually received the products or features she paid for. Apple already receives hundreds of thousands of reports each day from users, and allowing links to external payment options would only increase this burden. In essence, the introduction of external payment links, particularly without sufficient time to test and evaluate the security implications, will lead to the very same security concerns that Apple combats with the use of IAP more generally, which the Court agreed were legitimate, procompetitive reasons for the design of the App Store.

There are other unanswered questions regarding how successfully Apple protects App Store consumers – it was only last week that the company implemented a function that allows users to simply report blatant App Store scams.

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Techloaded247 Team
  • Website

Related Posts

How to sell Apple HomePod

Fan Favorite Disney Apple Watch Bands You’ll Love

Samsung Smart Tag Wallet: Overview

Galaxy Watch 4 42mm vs 46mm – The Right Size For You?

Add A Comment

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

New Comments
  • MintCoder on Apple removes the Apple Watch Series 6 from its official lineup
Techloaded247
WhatsApp Facebook Telegram Twitter Discord
  • Home
  • Tech
  • My Gadgets
  • Mobiles
  • Get In Touch

© 2023 Techloaded247. Designed by Techloaded Team.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.