Trending March 2024 # Epic Games Ceo Says The Company Spent Months Preparing For Its Lawsuit Against Apple # Suggested April 2024 # Top 12 Popular

You are reading the article Epic Games Ceo Says The Company Spent Months Preparing For Its Lawsuit Against Apple updated in March 2024 on the website Minhminhbmm.com. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested April 2024 Epic Games Ceo Says The Company Spent Months Preparing For Its Lawsuit Against Apple

Epic Games currently finds itself locked in a legal battle with both Apple and Google. And that was by choice. While it was rumored, and expected, to be the case right from the start, the CEO of Epic Games has confirmed it was a planned, and well-organized, effort to try and change Apple’s and Google’s digital storefronts.

CNN Business spoke with Epic Games’ CEO, Tim Sweeney, to get the lowdown on the situation between the company and Apple and Google. Sweeney is never one to mince words, and that remains the case here. While he does say that his legal battle is with Google, too, he doesn’t shy away from saying he’s particularly aiming at Apple.

Epic’s frustration with Apple especially, and Google to some extent, had been building up for at least three years. Ever since Fortnite grew to have a large audience, we felt stifled by several things.

So, as Fortnite, the mega-popular battle royale game grew in popularity (and earned Epic Games more money), the company grew tired of giving any of that money to other companies. Makes sense! And, as a result of that, a plan was set in motion. So much so, in fact, that Epic Games actually had an internal name for the effort: “Project Liberty”.

Sweeney confirms in this interview what many had suspected right out of the gate: this was all a plan, right from the start. You see, Epic Games added the ability for Fortnite players to pay Epic Games directly, avoiding Apple’s first-party payment system. That goes against Apple’s App Store rules and Epic Games was fully aware of that. But they did it anyway. And basically right after Apple pulled the game from the digital storefront, Epic launched its lawsuit.

Sweeney says the company “spent months” preparing the whole thing, from the lawsuit, to the planned in-app purchases, to even the marketing effort that launched soon after, too. That included an ad similar to Apple’s original “1984” marketing push from many years ago (which you can watch in the timeline below).

But, while this appears to be an argument against Apple’s (and Google’s) built-in fees, Sweeney has said it’s more than that, both in the past and in this interview:

I grew up in a time in which anybody could make software. This is my first computer, an Apple II,” said Sweeney, gesturing towards the iconic blocky, grey machine on the desk behind him. “You turn it on and it comes up with a programming language prompt,” he continued. “So I felt all along that open platforms are the key to free markets and the future of computing.

It’s not a secret, either, that Epic Games is struggling, at least somewhat, in these legal battles. While it’s technically possible for Android users to keep playing Fortnite, even without the game being available in the mobile OS’s storefront, that’s not the case for iOS users. And, as Apple and Epic Games have confirmed in the past, that was raking in millions of dollars for Epic thanks to in-app purchases. But, Sweeney says the battle is worth it, and doesn’t plan on backing down anytime soon.

[The companies] will just do that industry by industry and app category by app category until they’ve gobbled up everything that matters. And who will be left?” said Sweeney. “A million indie developers who collectively together make a small percentage of revenues on the app store because these businesses are too small to be attractive to steal.

The full interview is worth a read. It also includes some additional background on Sweeney himself.

You can check out the timeline of events so far in the Apple vs Epic Games battle below.

The timeline August 13, 2023

Epic Games updates Fortnite on the

server-side

, bypassing the App Store review

process

. It adds a direct payment option, breaking another rule in the

process

.

Apple removes Fortnite from the App Store due to

Epic Games

breaking the App Store rules.

Epic Games launches a media blitz, and it also sues Apple for anti-competitive behavior.

Epic launches “Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite”, a parody video of Apple’s original “1984” ad:

Google removes Fortnite from the Play Store, as Epic Games also violated the Play Store’s rules.

Epic sues Google, too.

Spotify weighs in! Unsurprisingly, it applauds Epic Games for its

decision

to stand up against Apple.

August 14, 2023

Facebook says Apple’s

App Store

fees make it impossible to help

small businesses

impacted by the coronavirus pandemic.

August 17, 2023

Apple threatens to revoke Epic Games’

developer

accounts for not only

iOS

, but also

macOS

. That cut-off is set to take place on Friday, August 28, 2023.

August 18, 2023

Apple issues an official statement on the matter in

response

to Epic Games.

Epic Games is revealed to have sought a coalition of “Apple critics” to help fight against Apple.

August 20, 2023

The Wall Street Journal and other news publications sign an open letter asking for Apple to reduce its

App Store

fees down to a standard 15%.

August 21, 2023

Epic Games promotes the #FreeFortnite Cup, or

tournament

, that is meant to bring even more attention against Apple, and is promoting “anti-Apple” prizes.

Epic sought special treatment for Fortnite before it declared war against Apple and the App Store’s guidelines.

August 24, 2023

Judge Gonzalez-Rogers rules that Apple does not need to reinstate Fortnite back into the App Store as the legal battle wages on. The judge also rules that Apple cannot revoke the Unreal Engine

development

tools, but it can still move forward with removing Epic’s developer account for

iOS

and macOS.

Apple says it agrees with the ruling made by Judge Gonzalez-Rogers, and is prepared to welcome Fortnite back onto iOS as soon as Epic Games is ready to follow the App Store guidelines.

August 26, 2023

Epic confirms that the new season of Fortnite, which is Marvel-themed, will not be available on iOS or Mac. Cross-platform functionality with those

platforms

is also removed.

August 28, 2023

Epic lets Fortnite players know in an email that it’s Apple’s fault they can’t

play

the new season of the game.

Apple revokes Epic Games’ App Store and developer accounts.

September 8, 2023

Apple countersues Epic Games in what it claims is a “breach of contract” related to its App Store practices.

September 9, 2023

Epic Games says Apple is going to disable the “Sign in with Apple”

feature

as soon as Friday, September 11.

Apple changes its mind regarding “Sign in with Apple”, allows existing

customers

to keep using it.

September 10, 2023 September 18, 2023

Epic Games shuts down Fortnite: Save the World for Mac as of September 23.

September 24, 2023

Epic Games, Spotify, Tile, and other

companies

create the “Coalition for App Fairness” to take on Apple’s and Google’s digital storefront policies.

September 28, 2023

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers says the public’s opinion regarding the legal battle between Apple and Epic Games should be considered, suggests a jury should be involved.

October 7, 2023

Judge rules that the court battle between Apple and Epic Games will resume in May 2023.

November 5, 2023

Fortnite returns to iOS thanks to GeForce Now game

streaming service

, and only available via Safari.

December 17, 2023

Judge orders both Tim

Cook

and Craig Federighi to testify in the legal battle between Apple and Epic Games.

December 21, 2023

Epic Games sends out “Free Fortnite” loot boxes to influencers, trying to drum up support

January 14, 2023

Epic Games expands its legal battle with Apple and Google to the United Kingdom

February 1, 2023

Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, is ordered to sit through a 7-hour deposition

You're reading Epic Games Ceo Says The Company Spent Months Preparing For Its Lawsuit Against Apple

Faq: Ftc’s Lawsuit Against Intel

The Federal Trade Commission filed an antitrust-related lawsuit against Intel Wednesday, accusing the chip maker of deliberately attempting hurt its competition and ultimately consumers. The landmark lawsuit alleges that Intel has deprived customers of choice by trying to slow down innovation among its rivals, and by keeping computer makers hooked with lucrative incentives for doing little business elsewhere.

Why is the FTC going after Intel now?

Intel’s allegedly anticompetitive practices have been in the news quite a bit lately, with “smoking gun” e-mails revealed in Europe’s antitrust lawsuit against Intel, the chip-maker’s settlement with underdog AMD, and New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo’s antitrust lawsuit against Intel. Dan Olds, principal analyst for the Gabriel Consulting Group, says that, against this background, it didn’t look good for the FTC to sit on the sidelines, and that the commission will likely seek a fine from Intel. Jim McGregor, In-Stat’s chief technology strategist, also called the lawsuit a publicity move by the government.

Have consumers been paying too much for processors?

Illustration: Harry Campbell

If the FTC’s allegations are true, consumers actually have not been paying too much for their PCs, according to experts. Because Intel has been allegedly attempting to undercut the competition, the price of Intel PCs may have been artificially lowered.

This isn’t about pricing for consumers, says Leslie Fiering, Gartner’s research vice president. At issue is whether it’s illegal to provide discounts and other incentives in exchange for a certain amount of business. So you could argue that Intel’s practices saved end-user customers money by charging manufacturers less. Those savings were theoretically passed on to consumers.

From a macro perspective, you could argue that in the long run, Intel’s alleged anticompetitive behavior could stifle the competition (AMD) and thereby allow Intel to own the PC semiconductor market and start charging much higher prices. But that scenario has not played out yet, say experts.

So what have consumers lost, superior products?

One of those possibly hurt is nVidia with its Ion graphics mobile chip. We won’t know for sure until details emerge, but nVidia may possibly have been locked out of netbooks whose manufacturers stuck millions of mininotebooks with the Atom’s integrated graphics, which can’t deliver high-quality video and is not adequate for graphics-heavy games.

Do consumers stand to gain better products as a result of the lawsuit?

nVidia isn’t so pessimistic. It applauds the FTC’s lawsuit, saying that it’s necessary to prevent Intel from blocking competition in the emerging GPU marketplace.

How will this case impact AMD?

Graphic: Diego AguirreMcGregor said it’s too late for the feds to give AMD a boost, as the company recently settled antitrust and intellectual property lawsuits with Intel. Gartner analyst Fiering also noted that Intel’s success comes partly from being a manufacturing powerhouse. AMD is divesting from chip manufacturing, and the settlement allows AMD to use any contract chip maker. In theory, this lets the company focus on innovation and product development, but that has nothing to do with the FTC’s lawsuit.

PCWorld’s resident chip expert, Jason Cross, says never say never when it comes to AMD. The company has very good engineers, a leadership position in graphics technology, and a huge cash infusion from the recent Intel/AMD suit settlement. Plus, AMD is quickly divesting their chip manufacturing off to GlobalFoundries, which should help prevent AMD from bleeding red ink.

How long will this case take to play out? In the end, what do consumers stand to gain?

Olds and McGregor both think the suit has very little in it for consumers. Even if Intel had to make concessions on volume discounts to computer makers, chip prices, McGregor says, would still fall due to consumer expectations and competition from AMD.

Will we see more AMD systems?

McGregor says that’s already happened over the last couple of years, partly because of increased scrutiny of Intel from other nations and partly because AMD has offered good prices on CPU and GPU combinations. And it’s unlikely that consumers will be compensated directly as a result of the FTC’s lawsuit, since fines would probably be placed in a general government fund.

The real winners, Olds says, are the lawyers, who could work on these cases for the rest of their legal careers.

Epic Games Is Shutting Down ‘Fortnite: Save The World’ For Macos On September 23

While the majority of attention for Fortnite is focused on its battle royale component, the game does offer another mode: Save the World. And now that is embroiled in the battle between Apple and Epic Games.

Yesterday, Epic Games used the official Twitter account for Fortnite to confirm that it will stop development for the PvE-styled Fortnite: Save the World on Wednesday, September 23, 2023. With that being the case, the company will effectively shut down the title for macOS on that date. When that date rolls around, the title will no longer be playable on Apple’s computers.

Apple is preventing us from distributing games on Mac which ends our ability to develop Fortnite: Save the World for the platform. Beginning September 23, 2023, Save the World will no longer be playable on Mac.

— Fortnite (@FortniteGame) September 17, 2023

Epic also published a blog post on the matter, and, of course, blames Apple for this turn of events. Epic says that Apple is “preventing Epic from signing games and patches for distribution on Mac, which ends our ability to develop and offer Fortnite: Save the World for the platform”. The company also notes that an incoming update, version 14.20, will most definitely cause some bugs to pop up in version 13.40 — the version of the game macOS players will be stuck on. That will apparently result in “a very poor experience” for players.

To avoid those issues, though, Epic Games has decided to shut down Fortnite: Save the World entirely on September 23, making it no longer playable.

Apple is preventing Epic from signing games and patches for distribution on Mac, which ends our ability to develop and offer Fortnite: Save the World for the platform. Specifically, our upcoming v14.20 release will cause bugs for players on v13.40, resulting in a very poor experience. Since we are no longer able to sign updates and release fixes for these issues, beginning September 23, 2023, Fortnite: Save the World will no longer be playable on macOS.

We are issuing a refund for all players who purchased any Save the World Founder’s or Starter Packs (including Upgrades) and played Save the World on macOS between September 17, 2023 and September 17, 2023. Additionally, any purchased V-Bucks spent on Llamas on macOS in this period will also be refunded. As of today, September 17, 2023, Save the World Starter Packs will no longer be available for purchase on macOS.

For those who might not know, Fortnite‘s Save the World setting is different than the mega-popular battle royale mode. In Save the World, players are tasked with eliminating monsters from the world, and they can work with other players to do so. There are still a variety of weapons to choose from, plenty of building, and traps to set. But it’s not a player-versus-player, but rather player-versus-everything setup.

And it appears it’s the latest victim in the ongoing legal battle between Apple and Epic Games.

The timeline of events that brought us to this point is below.

The timeline August 13, 2023

Epic Games updates Fortnite on the server-side, bypassing the App Store review process. It adds a direct payment option, breaking another rule in the process.

Apple removes Fortnite from the App Store due to Epic Games breaking the App Store rules.

Epic Games launches a media blitz, and it also sues Apple for anti-competitive behavior.

Epic launches “Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite”, a parody video of Apple’s original “1984” ad:

Google removes Fortnite from the Play Store, as Epic Games also violated the Play Store’s rules.

Epic sues Google, too.

Spotify weighs in! Unsurprisingly, it applauds Epic Games for its decision to stand up against Apple.

August 14, 2023

Facebook says Apple’s App Store fees make it impossible to help small businesses impacted by the coronavirus pandemic.

August 17, 2023

Apple threatens to revoke Epic Games’ developer accounts for not only iOS, but also macOS. That cut-off is set to take place on Friday, August 28, 2023.

August 18, 2023

Apple issues an official statement on the matter in response to Epic Games.

Epic Games is revealed to have sought a coalition of “Apple critics” to help fight against Apple.

August 20, 2023

The Wall Street Journal and other news publications sign an open letter asking for Apple to reduce its App Store fees down to a standard 15%.

August 21, 2023

Epic Games promotes the #FreeFortnite Cup, or tournament, that is meant to bring even more attention against Apple, and is promoting “anti-Apple” prizes.

Epic sought special treatment for Fortnite before it declared war against Apple and the App Store’s guidelines.

August 24, 2023

Judge Gonzalez-Rogers rules that Apple does not need to reinstate Fortnite back into the App Store as the legal battle wages on. The judge also rules that Apple cannot revoke the Unreal Engine development tools, but it can still move forward with removing Epic’s developer account for iOS and macOS.

Apple says it agrees with the ruling made by Judge Gonzalez-Rogers, and is prepared to welcome Fortnite back onto iOS as soon as Epic Games is ready to follow the App Store guidelines.

August 26, 2023

Epic confirms that the new season of Fortnite, which is Marvel-themed, will not be available on iOS or Mac. Cross-platform functionality with those platforms is also removed.

August 28, 2023

Epic lets Fortnite players know in an email that it’s Apple’s fault they can’t play the new season of the game.

Apple revokes Epic Games’ App Store and developer accounts.

September 8, 2023

Apple countersues Epic Games in what it claims is a “breach of contract” related to its App Store practices.

September 9, 2023

Epic Games says Apple is going to disable the “Sign in with Apple” feature as soon as Friday, September 11.

Apple changes its mind regarding “Sign in with Apple”, allows existing customers to keep using it.

September 10, 2023

Epic Games App Store Is Solving The Right Problem The Wrong Way

Epic Games app store is solving the right problem the wrong way

Epic Games is making rounds in headlines lately and not just because of games it publishes. It ended 2023 with some great news for gamers but bad news for Apple and Google. Actually, it’s bad news just for Google really. While it did not give out specifics, it reiterated what the game developer had already alluded to before. Its Epic Game Store isn’t going to stop at challenging the status quo in the PC gaming market. It’ll be taking its developer-centric cause to mobile but while its intentions are noble, it might do more harm than good in the long run.

Some may doubt the sincerity of Epic Games’ intentions but, at least publicly, its goals are definitely for the benefit of game developers and, in the final analysis, gamers. Its biggest contention is that game distributors, be it Steam, Google, or Apple, take too high a cut from sales of games or even in-app purchases. The 70/30 split results in smaller profits for game developers, especially smaller studios and individuals, which, in turn, produces less motivation to develop quality games and keep them updated with new content and bug fixes.

With its own Epic Games Store, the publisher is taking a very small cut, only 12%, just enough to cover the costs of operating the store and making a tiny profit. That 12% also covers the usual fee when using the Unreal Game engine so, whether you’re using UE or not, it offers equal opportunity for all game developers. It is reportedly already making waves in the PC gaming market to the point that Steam has also adjusted its revenue scheme lest it lose its favorable position.

On mobile, however, things can get a little bit messy. There are two main ways smartphone users can get their games, depending on their mobile platform. But while iOS has the iTunes App Store and only the iTunes App Store, Android has the Google Play Store and “everything else”. Epic Games has already snubbed Google’s store for the mobile version of its most lucrative cash cow yet, Fortnite.

But the story isn’t that simple either. Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has made it no secret that he is pushing for a more open mobile app ecosystem the way it is on PCs. Or at least was. By that, he meant curbing the practical monopolies of Google’s and Apple’s app stores. Again a noble cause but Epic’s answer might create more problems down the road.

Android’s openness is both its strength and its liability. The myriad ways one can install apps on it opens the door to potential security exploits, something Fortnite itself experienced first hand just after it launched Fortnite outside of Google Play Store. Now, it’s arguable that Google’s system is hardly perfect, given how many malicious apps are able to get past its automated bouncer. But it at least offers some semblance of security whereas the Epic Games Store might not. At least not yet.

And then there’s Apple. All of Epic’s rhetoric falls flat in the face of the iTunes App Store. There is no way that it’ll be able to officially offer an alternative store for iOS games and it was perfectly OK with the status quo on Apple’s App Store. Why wouldn’t it, especially after it made millions in IAPs in just the first month of Fortnite on iPhones. And that’s with the regular 70/30 cut. The Wall Street Journal theorizes that if Google changes its system, Apple will be forced to follow suit. That’s almost unlikely unless the entire industry decides on fairer revenue sharing. So Epic is really just gunning for Google because, ironically, its open ecosystem makes it an easier target.

That’s not to say Epic Games is wrong. The whole episode with Fortnite, followed by the Epic Games Store, has brought to light one of the dirty secrets of the gaming industry. And there is definitely a need for a more open mobile app ecosystem. But that openness should also take into account security and it should be fair for any and all. As it stands, Epic Games simple app store plans may benefit game developers in the short term but, in the long term, it might benefit no one but Epic and, well, Apple.

Microsoft Ceo Goes On Defensive, Says The Surface Is ‘A Real Business’

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer recently addressed the companies Surface and the tablet’s sales (or lack thereof).

Speaking with MIT Technology Review, while admitting the Microsoft product was not an iPad-killer, Ballmer stressed the Surface isn’t a post-PC fantasy, either…

“In an environment in which there’s 350 million PCs sold, I don’t think Surface is going to dominate volume,” Ballmer told Cnet during the interview.

Never mind sales that are luke-warm at best, or the Surface getting thumbs-down on repairs or the fact the overpriced tablet is underpowered – the tablet is “a real business,” Ballmer said.

So there.

Ballmer also told TechnologyReview the Surface is a long-term play:

I’m super-glad we did Surface. I think it is important – and not just for Microsoft, but for the entire Windows ecosystem – to see integrated hardware and software. 

And the ‘real business’ quote:

Surface is a real business. In an environment in which there’s 350 million PCs sold, I don’t think Surface is going to dominate volume, but it’s a real business.

Taking a page from Amazon, which never talks hard sales figures regarding the Kindle family, Microsoft has left it to analysts to describe how the Surface performs.

My guess is those descriptions won’t wind up on a warm-and-fuzzy Surface promo. For instance, initial shipments of the Surface RT – launched in October 2012 – likely outnumbered actually sales.

While 1.25 million Microsoft tablets shipped, sales actually hovered around 55 percent to 60 percent of that figure, iHS iSuppli said in January. That means 680,000 to 750,000 Surface units actually initially sold.

Before someone throws a flag on the play, other products have had low initial sales. But the Surface RT had a type of reversal in demand. Turns out people were rushing to return the gadgets.

The Surface Pro – seen as saving Microsoft’s bacon after the RT – wasn’t greeted with much enthusiasm, either. As CNET points out, upon the Surface Pro’s initial sales, Microsoft proudly hailed it a success, the tablet selling out.

But that sell out was limited to Microsoft stores. As skeptical journalists are want to do, the site asks whether Microsoft rigged the results by providing a small enough inventory to be sure there was no repeat of the Surface RT launch fiasco.

Even Chairman Bill Gates said he wasn’t satisfied with Microsoft’s innovation, telling Charlie Rose of CBS News his company should do lots more in terms of breakthroughs.

Ballmer and I are two of the most self-critical people – you can imagine. And here were a lot of amazing things that Steve’s leadership got done with the company in the last year. Windows 8 is key to the future, the Surface computer. Bing, people are seeing as a better search product, Xbox.

But is – is it enough? No, he and I are not satisfied that in terms of, you know, breakthrough things, that we’re doing everything possible.

There’s your clip.

Not only can’t Microsoft admit the Surface is a failed example of me-too tablet iPad envy, but in the interview, Ballmer metaphorically positions his company as a Silicon Valley rebel.

The Surface is Microsoft’s James Dean moment after vendors balked at pen-based computing. Which is fittingly ironic, as Dean was best known for the movie “Rebel Without a Cause.”

Internet Archive Just Lost A Federal Lawsuit Against Big Book Publishers

Internet Archive, best known for a tool called the Wayback Machine, is also a massive non-profit digital library, free to everyone who creates an account with their email address. However, in 2023, it was sued by four corporate publishers over copyright issues, and in 2023, the non-profit organization asked a federal judge to put a stop to the lawsuit. Last week, the case came before US District Judge John Koeltl of New York, and on Friday, the federal judge ruled in favor of the publishers. 

At its heart, the dispute is around the way that the digital library lends books. Hachette Book Group, which comprises Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin, and Wiley, alleged that 127 books under their copyright were scanned and loaned out electronically without their permission. Internet Archive argues that this practice is fair use. 

Typically, public and academic libraries acquire books for their patrons by either buying the physical copies, or paying for ebook licenses through so-called aggregators like OverDrive. Each publisher has a slightly different profit model when it comes to licensing. But in summary, all of them are fairly lucrative. “For example, library ebook licenses generate around $59 million per year for Penguin. Between 2024 and 2023, HarperCollins earned $46.91 million from the American library ebook market,” according to a court filing on the case. 

[Related: A copyright lawsuit threatens to kill free access to Internet Archive’s library of books]

Internet Archive mostly employed a practice called Controlled Digital Lending, where it first purchases a hard copy of a book, and scans it to make an ebook. Controlled Digital Lending works so that if the library owns one physical copy of a book, it can lend the digital version out to one user at a time, and if it owns four physical copies, then it can lend out four digital copies. Internet Archive uses software to ensure that users cannot copy or view the copies after the loan period. 

But, it temporarily suspended this policy during the COVID-19 lockdowns in order to implement a “National Emergency Library.” With the Emergency Library in place from March to June 2023, that policy was relaxed. As a result, many readers were allowed to borrow the same book simultaneously. And this appears to be the key issue that is swaying the judge to the publishers’ side, NPR reported. Reuters reported that Koeltl honed in on the question of “whether the library has the right to reproduce the book that it otherwise has the right to possess.”

Internet Archive doesn’t dispute that it copied the publishers’ works without permission. But its argument is that the doctrine of fair use “allows some unauthorized uses of copyrighted works,” granted that it aligns with the copyright law’s original purpose, which is to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,” according to the court filing. Fair use exemptions in court can be complicated and are considered on a case-to-case basis, since many factors like the effect on the market, the transformation on the original, and the purpose of use need to be accounted for. And ultimately, the judge ruled that “each enumerated fair use factor favors the Publishers.”

Based on the ruling, Internet Archive can still distribute books in its collection that are public domain. “It also may use its scans of the Works in Suit, or other works in its collection, in a manner consistent with the uses deemed to be fair in Google Books and HathiTrust,” the filing stated. “What fair use does not allow, however, is the mass reproduction and distribution of complete copyrighted works in a way that does not transform those works and that creates directly competing substitutes for the originals.”

In a statement, Internet Archive said that it planned to appeal the judgment. “This decision impacts libraries across the US who rely on controlled digital lending to connect their patrons with books online,” Chris Freeland, the director of Open Libraries at Internet Archive, wrote in a blog post. “It hurts authors by saying that unfair licensing models are the only way their books can be read online.” 

Additionally, in its petition site’s FAQ, Internet Archive noted that the ruling has the potential not only to impact how libraries work, but also on preserving content against the threat of censorship. “Most digital books can only be licensed, meaning there is effectively only one copy of a digital book and it can be edited or deleted at any time with zero transparency,” the site stated. “In this scenario, profit-motivated big publishing shareholders for companies like Newscorp, Amazon, and Disney are in control of whether a book is censored or not.” 

Update the detailed information about Epic Games Ceo Says The Company Spent Months Preparing For Its Lawsuit Against Apple on the Minhminhbmm.com website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!