This situation is very complex, but the outcome of the court case will have huge consequences. It wouldn't surprise me if it gets pushed around a couple courts for a year or two.

On the one hand, I think Epic's decision to flagrantly ignore the developer agreement in order to tease out a ban was a mistake. At the most basic level its going to cost them a ton of money, but its also become something of a red herring in the court case. It may work to their favor, as Apple goes scorched earth on all of their properties and ability to develop on Apple platforms, but its a huge gambit that could just as easily end with them never being allowed back on an Apple platform. That won't benefit anyone.

Apple's side came out with a statement maybe yesterday which essentially outlined the insane amount of effort Apple went through to support Fortnite on iOS, including setting up a 24/7 support team, express reviewing dozens of updates, and sending engineers to North Carolina to help them integrate with Metal/Apple Silicon. That also doesn't come off good for Epic. The effort Apple put in may not be explicitly valued at the low-hundreds of millions of dollars Apple has made off of their 30% cut, but its also not worth nothing (and certainly worth more than the $100/year developers pay to have an Apple Developer account). It comes off like Epic wants all of the support, marketing, and customers Apple provides, then when its convenient for them, they sue for the ability to release their own store on iOS and bypass all the cuts Apple would take.

Additionally, Epic has chosen Apple as the target for this crusade, while they still gladly lay in bed with Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo, and actively cast Linux aside via refusing to support it in Fortnite/Epic Games Store, and even removing support for it in Rocket League. I'm firmly on the side that iOS needs a more open and equitable application ecosystem; whether that means alternate storefronts, or alternate payment processors, or lessened app submission rules, I don't know. But Epic is schizophrenic. Valve is a great example of a company that, excepting a few isolated releases that they likely treat as mistakes, actually does push for supporting open platforms in both word and deed. It can be done. But, again, this comes off like Epic wanting their cake and eating it too. Why does Epic still put up with PlayStation, despite they also taking 30% and disallowing alternate storefronts? Well, they probably negotiated a lower rate, and it doesn't hurt that Sony owns like 3% of Epic. So Apple argues that they don't negotiate, and everyone is charged the same rate? That doesn't look good for Epic.

But, on Apple's side: I can't in good faith trust their desire to get into TV, Music, and Gaming while still being fair in App Store policies. There are zero examples of megacorps having that much broad & specific control over the success of their competitors and not abusing it. Apple needs to lose this case, to some degree. There are billions of computer users totally beholden to Apple's policies, and tens of thousands of developers who can't just ignore those users and expect their business to survive. Would Spotify be ok without iOS? Netflix? Hey? I don't know, but while Epic will absolutely be fine, I suspect one click in an App Store administrative console could mean the end of many businesses. These businesses don't need App Store marketing. They don't need highly complex platform technologies, nor A22x Apple Hyper-Silicon, nor Apple Pay, nor anything differentiable Apple provides; they just need the eyes and ears of their customers, who happened to pick iOS for reasons unrelated to their business. There should be a place for applications like these on iOS, which are fundamentally different from applications that are built to their core with Apple tech, rely on Apple marketing, the App Store's 70%, and legitimately gain a lot from the relationship with Apple.