Apple CEO Tim Cook informed staff that he was “looking forward to moving forward” after a verdict within the Epic v. Apple antitrust case. In an all-hands assembly with staff, Cook echoed the road Apple has taken publicly on the case, celebrating the corporate’s authorized wins and downplaying its loss on an unfair competitors declare.

“If you sort of back up and remember what the App Store is about, the App Store was built to be a trusted place for users so they could go explore and discover apps. It was meant to be a great business opportunity for developers,” Cook informed staff, in response to a recording of the assembly obtained by The Verge. “Epic came along and wanted basically to be handled in a special way. Our rules are that we treat everyone the same. They ask us repeatedly to treat them different, we said no, and they sued us on 10 different items. The court ruled nine of those in favor of Apple and one in favor of Epic. Most importantly, they ruled that Apple is not a monopoly, which we’ve always known. Apple is in a fiercely competitive market.”

Epic CEO Tim Sweeney requested Apple final yr to let it embody alternate cost strategies in its iOS model of the sport Fortnite. However, Sweeney mentioned that Epic “hope[d] that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers.”

Contrary to Cook’s assertion that “we treat everyone the same,” Apple has supplied particular remedy to a wide range of app builders prior to now. It supplied Netflix a particular deal the place it took only a 15 % minimize of subscriptions bought contained in the app, and weighed providing particular perks to Netflix if the streaming video firm would keep help for in-app purchases. The firm additionally carved out classes of apps that may bypass its fee for in-app purchases, and blocked or determined to not characteristic apps it seemingly feared may compete. You can see examples of particular remedy for specific builders in our assortment of unearthed emails from the Epic v. Apple trial.

Cook is right, nevertheless, {that a} California decide dominated Apple didn’t have a monopoly in digital gaming transactions — the related market in Epic v. Apple. The firm efficiently prevented Epic’s calls for that it open up iOS to third-party app shops and sideloaded apps, and the court docket mentioned Apple was justified in gathering a fee on digital items.

Cook didn’t affirm whether or not Apple deliberate to attraction its one loss: the decision that Apple’s anti-steering guidelines (which prohibit builders from telling customers about alternate cost choices) violate California’s Unfair Competition Law. The ruling orders Apple to desert the principles by December. Meanwhile, Epic has indicated that it plans to attraction its personal losses.

But like Apple spokespeople have executed publicly, Cook prompt he wasn’t overly fearful. “I think the ruling will be very good to try to put some of the discussions to rest on the App Store. In terms of the one we lost, there were one or two sentences scratched out of an agreement, that was the extent of it. I’m sort of looking forward to moving forward now,” Cook mentioned.