Facing the multi-trillion dollar gorilla, if this would even be a relevent perspective.

When was Epic ever given a chance to negotiate the terms of this contract?

They were given the same chance as you and I are with Epic's TOS for their games/game store.

They wanted access to the iOS market, and the terms were there.

Which same chance is that? Please fill me in, I've never negotiated with Epic's game store.

That's unfortunate, maybe neither of them should be doing it?

Is it though? If you create a set of rules for your sandbox and somebody comes along and wants to play in it but only if you change the rules and you say “no thanks”, that seems totally reasonable. Why should you have to negotiate?

The "sandbox" isn't their property anymore, it was sold to the end user when they bought the phone.

Maybe this is one of the fundamental misunderstandings of these arguments: those who think this statement to be true and those who don’t. You bought the phone, you didn’t buy the ecosystem, buying a $500 phone doesn’t give you the right to dictate the multi-billion dollar business.

But it gives the vendor the right to tax you 30% on all future purchases related to that device, even if you disapprove of the job they're doing in stewarding the ecosystem? Despite that there are plenty of other vendors standing by that would be happy to steward it if given the opportunity?

> it's very clearly a move to gain public sentiment to their side

While they have certainly engaged in PR, I really don't see this motion as being motivated by PR in any way...

> the multi-billion dollar contract-breaking underdog.

This is assuming Apple wins. If Epic is right they didn't break any contract because the terms Apple is claiming they broke were in fact not legally binding in the first place, by virtue of being illegal.