By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom said:
AsGryffynn said:

How does this logic even work? Why would a case against Apple make them more legitimate? Regardless of the reason, that 30% cut is wrong and indefensible

That's the way the legal system works. If Apple wins in this case, that case becomes an authority. So, if another team comes with a case, apple will say "In Epic Games v. Apple (or w/e) it was ruled that the App Store is not a monopoly". Then the other side has the additional burden of demonstrating why this case is different and that ruling shouldn't apply.

Apple's cut btw is 30%, but drops to 15% for subscriptions longer than a year. 

I know that much. But this case is extremely hard to defend against specifically because of it. This happened before, remember? Like, do people forget the shit MSFT got into in the early 00's?