Earlier this week,we reportedon Apple’s filing of its own expert testimony in its legal battle withEpic Games. And now it’s Epic’s turn to weigh in.
As reported today by9to5Mac, Epic Games has sought the opinion of several different experts, mostly academics in this regard. In an effort to push forward with its antitrust case against Apple, Epic Games sought the informed opinion of folks who would agree with it. And, of course, there were plenty of experts out there that did.
The original report notes that the focus for most of the academics is the fact that, despite Apple’s claims, it can indeed have a monopoly on access to apps, iOS apps specifically, despite the fact that a competing platform (Android) exists. What’s more, the experts say that Apple does indeed give its own competing apps an unfair advantage, and that, ultimately, “security” is just a way for Apple to argue against competing apps and digital storefronts.
Dr. David Evans is from the University College London, and he says that while it may be technically possible to switch from one platform to another, it’s not realistic for many customers. That’s because it would mean that, in many cases, an iOS user who switches to Android, or vice versa, would need to buy the apps on the new platform all over again.
iOS and Android users make sunk cost investments in hardware, software, and learning for their respective ecosystems. A decision to switch OSs is a decision to move ecosystems, meaning consumers would lose the value of these investments and have to make new ones. These costs reduce consumers’ incentive to switch.
Susan Athey, a professor of Economics of Technology at Stanford, weighed in as well, pushing back against Apple’s claim that a single app store on iOS is paramount to the platform’s security:
My expert opinion is that iPhone security is in fact significantly independent of the review process and the distribution channel (however they may be implemented). Thus, my expert opinion is that Apple considerably overstates the security benefits of its centralized App Store model. Apple is justified in caring about the security of its users; however, an iPhone’s security guarantees are predominantly enforced by the iPhone’s operating system, not by Apple’s App Store and the associated review process.
And then Georgia Institute of Technology professor Wenke Lee piled on with that idea, saying Apple could sign developer certificates just like it does on Mac:
I have evaluated the iOS security model based on Apple’s own stated goals and processes for enforcing security on iOS. My analysis led me to conclude that … the same security features Apple seeks to enforce on iOS can be achieved without the need for exclusive distribution. For instance, third parties could perform the same security screening steps taken during App Review, and Dr. Rubin does not dispute this. Third parties can also perform developer identity verification and code signing. Most importantly, all of the on-device mechanisms that enforce security on iOS are independent of the app distribution model.
Epic Games and Apple’s bench trial begins on Monday, July 12, 2025. The timeline of how we got here is below.
