took his first turn in the witness chair this morning in what is probably the most anticipated testimony of the Epic v. case. But rather than a fiery condemnation of Epic’s shenanigans and allegations, Cook offered a mild, carefully tended ignorance that left many of the lawsuit’s key questions unanswered or unanswerable. This anticlimax may not make for exciting reporting, but it could defy the dangerous, if somewhat dubious argument that Apple’s amounts to a monopoly.
After being, Cook took the stand, Law360’s Dorothy Atkins, one of two media members allowed in the court, reported in her comprehensive live-tweeting of the testimony. The quotes from Cook are as written and not to be considered verbatim; the court transcript will follow when the document is compiled and made public. Incidentally, Atkins’ stage-setting descriptions are appealing and humanizing, though comes off as a bit weird:
The questioning of Cook by his own company’s counsel was gentle and directed at reiterating why Apple’s company constantly retains developers and users. The facade of innocent ignorance began when he was asked about Apple’s R&D numbers — $15-20 billion annually for the . Specifically, he said that Apple couldn’t estimate how much of that money was directed towards the because “we don’t allocate like that,” i.e., research budgets for individual products aren’t broken out from the rest.is superior and sufficient for iOS users while also asserting the presence of stiff competition. He admitted to many conflicts with developers, such as differing priorities or needing to improve discovery, but said the
Now, that doesn’t sound right. A company like Apple knows how much it spends on its products and research. Even if it can’t be perfectly broken down — an advance in MacOS code may play into a feature on the— the company must know to some extent how its resources are being deployed and to what effect. To do otherwise would be folly. The differences between a conservative and liberal estimation of the App Store’s R&D allocation might be significant, perhaps, in the hundreds of millions, but make no mistake; those estimations are almost certainly being produced internally.
But because the numbers are not publicly declared and broken down and are likely to be somewhat fuzzy, Cook can say truthfully that there’s no single number like (to invent an amount) “App Store R&D was $500 million in 2019.” Not having a complex number removes a potential foothold for Epic, which could use it either way: If it’s big, they’re protecting their golden goose (enforcing market power). If it’s small, they’re just collecting the eggs (collecting rent via market power)., so Cook plays dumb, and consequently, Epic’s argument looks like speculation (and, as Apple would argue, fabulation).
He then deployed a similar strategy of starving the competition with a preemptive shrug about profits. He only addressed total net sales, about $275 billion at a 21 percent profit margin, saying idea that it cannot be assessed as a standalone business is ludicrous. Again, it is nearly certain that it is dissected and reported internally in excruciating detail like all of Apple’s divisions and product lines. But again, it is just plausible that for legal purposes, it is not straightforward enough to say “the income and profits of the are such and such,” thus denying Epic its datum.does not evaluate the App Store’s income as a standalone business. Indeed it is arguable that the is a tightly integrated component of a larger business structure. But the
However, the point is important enough that Epic thought it warranted independent investigation. And among the first things, Epic’s attorney brought up when the witness was turned over to him was the testimony from earlier in the trial by an expert witness that Apple’soperating margins were around 79 percent. It was not Apple’s interest to confirm or deny these numbers, and Cook again pleaded ignorance. However, the mask slipped when Epic’s attorney asked Cook to break down the personal income numbers that combined the Mac and iOS . While Apple objected to this, saying it was privileged information and could only be divulged in a closed court, Cook offered that the iOS numbers are “much larger” than the Mac numbers.