[reticulated]

I don't understand why Epic don't persue the argument of an unlevel playing field.

Amazon don't have to pay 30% for every transaction I make through the Amazon app on my iPhone. Same with eBay. Yes, I know Apple class these as different categories, but when push comes to shove what's the real difference here?

Epic are providing electronic assets that they have paid in-house artists to create and want to distribute in exchange for their in-game currency (V-Bucks). Why should Apple cream 30% off the top of that revenue?

Other than the electronic distribution, Apple has no fixed or variable costs relating to these in-game assets.

I fully agree Apple should take a cut of Fortnite being a reviewed, and therefore trusted, app on their store. I find it hard to justify the ongoing 30% cut of additional assets that bear no discernable cost.

[LexGray]

Take your average high end mall, Apple negotiates with the mall owner to pay much less than other stores because having Apple around makes the mall more attractive. Equally unfair as the Amazon case?

Every business owner, mall owner, or head office of a franchise takes a large cut of the profits with likely little in fixed or variable costs. Saying this should change is like arguing society is fundamentally flawed. With the market as it is now Apple can ask for the 30% just for being associated with the brand.