Stefan Mileschin

Depends on Apple admitting that there are better and cheaper products out there

The judge overseeing the high-stakes trial between Epic Games and Apple hinted at a compromise that turns on the iPhone maker allowing developers to inform users through their mobile apps that they can buy virtual goods on the web at a cheaper cost.

US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers appeared to be looking for a middle ground while hearing from economists called by companies as expert witnesses in a case that threatens to upend the multibillion-dollar marketplace for apps that run on mobile phones around the world.

The judge questioned Apple's App Store rule that blocks developers from including a link or other information in their apps to steer users away from the store to buy virtual goods elsewhere online at a discounted rate. The anti-steering policy is at the heart of Epic's argument that Apple maintains a near-monopoly and juices profits by barring developers from offering alternative payment options in their apps.

Unfortunately, Rogers seemed to be steering towards common sense, which is not the sort of thing that Apple has built its business model on. However, some of her questions are the sorts of things that would have been mentioned in any board meeting outside a company like Apple.

https://fudzilla.com/news/52863-judg...mes-compromise