Support NeoGAF

[borborygmus]

That argument from Epic is some straight up communist shit.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Get ready for expensive hardware if this happens.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Apple could not release an iphone for the next 10 years and still make money off things like Apple Music, Macbooks etc. Epic needs to at some point drop the lawsuit. I wanna see this lawsuit in Epic's favor.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Allowing other marketplaces on consoles would not be damaging at all.
Most people would still buy via the official platform holder store and it would help create some much needed competition on price in the digital market place. Right now people are buying digital even when it is massively overpriced compared to retail.

Sony and MS don't pass on any savings to consumers. Digital sales are massively more profitable per unit as there is no production and transport cost and no retailer cut of the sale. Steam has not been hurt by the myriad of key selling websites. The vast majority still buy from the official steam store, even in the sale of exactly identical digital items.
Epic would quickly find most consumers prefer the platform holders payment portal whether it be Apple, Sony or MS. Sadly I don't see them winning they should have planned this out better. We should have competition in the digital space, even on closed platorms.

You aren't figuring in the prices you are paying for the console (too little, sold breakeven or at loss) and the R&D to build the console. If the console makers lost their cut, the console market is dead.

If you want to play games, build a PC and pay for parts at pricing that provides vendors a direct return.

I think MS is misguided if they are following Epic's logic on this one. Just focus on getting your streaming service working in a browser window, if Apple starts to block access to specific sites or block access to third-party browsers (MS should focus on getting edge prepped for streaming), that's a much easier legal case to win and one that doesn't endanger the foundation of the console business and AAA games.

 

[Soodanim]

4 companies who don't put out any games of importance of worth. There is a very easy solution to this problem: don't play their games.

An opinion doesn’t have much relevance, even if I share it. Consoles thrive because of their simplicity, and to open up the way for publishers to have their own store with associated log in would mean logging into up to 5 different stores. You might see cheaper prices for some, but you would likely see exclusives in each store like on PC. So all you’re left with is less convenience so the big publishers get to push their content via their stores. Publishers win, consumers lose.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Microsoft isn’t misguided because this is exactly what they want.

 

[LarknThe4th]

The system that Nintendo created to safeguard there software in the absolute cluster fuck that was pre NES videogames may potentially be fucked up because of a pissing contest between Epic and Apple?

We will see how it turns out but I'm assuming whowever wins there will be appeals for years after it, just breeding more uncertainty, clowns

 

[Stefan.North]

It would be amazing if Nintendo, Sony and MS where forced to allow third party stores on their devices but I doubt it will ever happen.

Hmmm... have steam on Switch, devs pay 30% steam tax plus 30% nintendo tax (30% over initial 30% actually is 69% increase). SMH

 

[DaGwaphics]

Hmmm... have steam on Switch, devs pay 30% steam tax plus 30% nintendo tax (30% over initial 30% actually is 69% increase). SMH

If Epic gets its way here, Nintendo wouldn't be able to enforce its 30% in the competing store. No savings to the user or greater profits for dev, the money just goes to Steam now. The end result would be every major publisher has their own store, and the console makers have to turn a profit from software and the hardware itself (easier for Nintendo).

 

[reksveks]

Hmmm... have steam on Switch, devs pay 30% steam tax plus 30% nintendo tax (30% over initial 30% actually is 69% increase). SMH

that's not how it would work.

If Epic gets its way here, Nintendo wouldn't be able to enforce its 30% in the competing store. No savings to the user or greater profits for dev, the money just goes to Steam now. The end result would be every major publisher has their own store, and the console makers have to turn a profit from software and the hardware itself (easier for Nintendo).

we saw publishers try that on pc and fell back onto steam and epic slightly, so it might just happen again on consoles.

 

[Bryank75]

Also, just a thought but couldn't a platform holder charge a massive registration fee and have a very difficult registration process to get an App or other store on their hardware and just say no for any reason while still saying it is 'open'....

 

[The Pleasure]

If Epic gets its way here, Nintendo wouldn't be able to enforce its 30% in the competing store. No savings to the user or greater profits for dev, the money just goes to Steam now. The end result would be every major publisher has their own store, and the console makers have to turn a profit from software and the hardware itself (easier for Nintendo).

Nintendo can fuck em by making physical only killing the eshop and banning epic from sdks. Glorious return of physical media. Ahhh danke.

 

[Bryank75]

Nintendo can fuck em by making physical only killing the eshop and banning epic from sdks. Glorious return of physical media. Ahhh danke.

Id be pretty ok with that for Sony too. In fact I'd kinda prefer it.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Also, just a thought but couldn't a platform holder charge a massive registration fee and have a very difficult registration process to get an App or other store on their hardware and just say no for any reason while still saying it is 'open'....

They could try it, but that's an easier court case than the current one.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Nintendo can fuck em by making physical only killing the eshop and banning epic from sdks. Glorious return of physical media. Ahhh danke.

Well that would be a possible solution. You'd likely see challenges quickly regarding the licensing fees currently paid on physical disks. The devs should be able to release their software on disk themselves without this walled garden licensing approach. After all, you can release physical media for PC/Mac/Linux without getting clearance or paying a toll. Once this process starts it never stops until the platforms are completely open. I hope Apple wins on all counts.

 

[The Pleasure]

Well that would be a possible solution. You'd likely see challenges quickly regarding the licensing fees currently paid on physical disks. The devs should be able to release their software on disk themselves without this walled garden licensing approach. After all, you can release physical media for PC/Mac/Linux without getting clearance or paying a toll. Once this process starts it never stops until the platforms are completely open. I hope Apple wins on all counts.

Anyone can code. But cartridges and the manufacturing? That's all proprietary. If forced you can make them build the facility. For billions of dollars. Notice the switch carts all still say "made in Japan"?

 

[Trogdor1123]

Hope this gets solved soon, my kids want me to play fortnite with them and the content not device left in my house is my phone. Computer, switch and PS4 are already going

 

[Dr Bass]

Sorry but the judge is absurdly wrong if that's what she believes.

Consoles are toys with a singular purpose. Play video games, which are completely non-essential to every day life.

Phones are general computing platforms that are integral to the daily lives of people and the fabric of society. Many small companies now live in fear of Apple because of its ability to basically put anyone they want out of business on a whim, that they don't even have to explain.

The government got this exactly right in their recent statement from their anti-trust review:

Apple exerts monopoly power in the mobile app store market, controlling access to more than 100 million iPhones and iPads in the U.S…..In the absence of competition, Apple’s monopoly power over software distribution to iOS devices has resulted in harms to competitors and competition, reducing quality and innovation among app developers, and increasing prices and reducing choices for consumers.

What Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook have at stake in the antitrust fight

Breaking down the report, one company at a time.

www.theverge.com

As far as I can tell, most people in my industry agree with the above statement, because it's all over software engineering circles.

No one gives a about consoles the same way because they don't have the same purpose as phones (and tablets) and they aren't general computing platforms. The judge needs to do a little more learning.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Sorry but the judge is absurdly wrong if that's what she believes.

Consoles are toys with a singular purpose. Play video games, which are completely non-essential to every day life.

Phones are general computing platforms that are integral to the daily lives of people and the fabric of society. Many small companies now live in fear of Apple because of its ability to basically put anyone they want out of business on a whim, that they don't even have to explain.

The government got this exactly right in their recent statement from their anti-trust review:

What Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook have at stake in the antitrust fight

Breaking down the report, one company at a time.

www.theverge.com

As far as I can tell, most people in my industry agree with the above statement, because it's all over software engineering circles.

No one gives a about consoles the same way because they don't have the same purpose as phones (and tablets) and they aren't general computing platforms. The judge needs to do a little more learning.

This is a case about a "completely non-essential game". I think that's where the parallels come from. We'll see how it turns out.

To general software devs, I can see your point. From a game dev point of view, I can't see them getting a win like this on mobile and not wanting the same in the console space (to them there is no difference between Sony's 100m users and Apple's.

 

[massivekettle]

Also, just a thought but couldn't a platform holder charge a massive registration fee and have a very difficult registration process to get an App or other store on their hardware and just say no for any reason while still saying it is 'open'....

The process maybe but not sure about the fee - it’s the whole reason why Epic is suing!

Also, I would assume that this order would extend to physical media as well, if Epic wins and the ruling has been extended to video game systems.

 

[sainraja]

Well let’s analyze that.

Those console exist at their current Price points because they make money from sales.

For context look at MS latest FY earnings.

They were +1bn from 3rd party software and service sales on Xbox compared to the previous year.

Except they were -34% console hardware sales so the result was only a net +189m. Hardware cost MS about 800m.

Hardware is a cost to drive software sales.

Remove the software sales cut, the hardware is gone in the way we know it now.

Probably double the price of the consoles, probably increase the software prices too, and kiss goodbye to the custom hardware - they’ll be mid spec PC boxes.

Maybe some want it to go that way - streaming content being the only way to access games and you’ll have to subscribe to several different services. It’ll end up costing the consumer more than it does now with each store trying to lock you in.

I am not looking forward to that day. =[

 

[llien]

I recently said it in another thread, but I sincerely hope the walled garden stays on consoles. Reason? EA, Ubisoft, Epic, Bethesda, and every other cunt who would happily force people to install shit to play their games. It’s a nuisance on PC, and consoles should be a haven from those practices.

I understand that this thread is a hidden championship in ignorance, but gog galaxy officially supports EPIC store, among others.

 

[IntentionalPun]

They were +1bn from 3rd party software and service sales on Xbox compared to the previous year.

Except they were -34% console hardware sales so the result was only a net +189m. Hardware cost MS about 800m.

Hardware is a cost to drive software sales.

LOLwut?

That's not how their financial results work..

 

[sainraja]

If I buy a computing device of any kind why can't I install whatever application or program on it? It's my personal property.

I understand companies voiding warranties because of tinkering, being able to curate their own stores, and banning hackers using their online network. But straight up blocking side loading is dumb. All platforms should be as open and free as a computer or at least Android phones.

You have open system options. Just not with Apple. You are not required to buy Apple.

 

[Bryank75]

The process maybe but not sure about the fee - it’s the whole reason why Epic is suing!

Also, I would assume that this order would extend to physical media as well, if Epic wins and the ruling has been extended to video game systems.

The cleanest thing they could do is negotiate a preferential rate for Epic and get them to drop the whole thing.... but there is a risk others would find out and try the same thing.

 

[sainraja]

Sorry but the judge is absurdly wrong if that's what she believes.

Consoles are toys with a singular purpose. Play video games, which are completely non-essential to every day life.

Phones are general computing platforms that are integral to the daily lives of people and the fabric of society. Many small companies now live in fear of Apple because of its ability to basically put anyone they want out of business on a whim, that they don't even have to explain.

The government got this exactly right in their recent statement from their anti-trust review:

What Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook have at stake in the antitrust fight

Breaking down the report, one company at a time.

www.theverge.com

As far as I can tell, most people in my industry agree with the above statement, because it's all over software engineering circles.

No one gives a about consoles the same way because they don't have the same purpose as phones (and tablets) and they aren't general computing platforms. The judge needs to do a little more learning.

Saying consoles are just for video games isn't exactly true and you know that. Also, you are defining them as toys with a singular purpose (consoles nowadays do a lot more than just gaming, to say otherwise is false.) We can get games, movies, browse the web and on the Xbox you can even Skype with friends/family. Just because most of the "apps" they offer on their stores happen to be games doesn't really need to accounted for in a "special" way.

 

[Kdad]

The bundling of an app into the os is quite literally the tent pole of the anti-trust investigation into Microsoft in the 90's. I think you seen Apple's small move into allowing users to change default app as a token gift to regulators but I suspect it won't be enough.

Wasnt the bigger issue that MS was strong arming hardware manufacturers that they could not load other software esp browsers if they wanted to have windows on their machines? (Ie what google has been accused of doing but its slightly different in that they are not denying the OS they are denying the play store and what comes with it) That is fundamentally different than Apple who controls both the software AND the hardware.

 

[sainraja]

The cleanest thing they could do is negotiate a preferential rate for Epic and get them to drop the whole thing.... but there is a risk others would find out and try the same thing.

I doubt they would actually drop it and would just use it as "ammo" against Apple.

 

[The Pleasure]

This is a case about a "completely non-essential game". I think that's where the parallels come from. We'll see how it turns out.

To general software devs, I can see your point. From a game dev point of view, I can't see them getting a win like this on mobile and not wanting the same in the console space (to them there is no difference between Sony's 100m users and Apple's.

Difference is console players pay for games. Mobile users don't. Those console players are far more valuable unless the ads are so heavy that people quit almost immediately like ea and their ufc game.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Difference is console players pay for games. Mobile users don't. Those console players are far more valuable unless the ads are so heavy that people quit almost immediately like ea and their ufc game.

Fortnite is free on everything right? And Sony makes more money from their cut of RTX than all the software they develop, sell, or license for PS. We'll see how it works out.

Fortnite could just as easy add a direct pay option to the console version.

 

[Bryank75]

Remember, Epic is just fighting this battle for their Chinese overlords Tencent. If Epic wins we’ll see even more Chinese tentacles in our markets. But it looks like Apple has a solid case and Epic look a little ridiculous.

Exactly, that's what it's all about... getting Chinese software all over iOS and dominating all platforms by flooding them with software. Pushing their ideology etc.

 

[The Pleasure]

Fortnite is free on everything right? And Sony makes more money from their cut of RTX than all the software they develop, sell, or license for PS. We'll see how it works out.

Fortnite could just as easy add a direct pay option to the console version.

Lol firmware ban. I remember that trick. Mix it with something intangible and game breaking lile freeing more ram from the system. There's lots of ways to fuck with Tim. And Fortnite isn't gonna last forever. Another flavor will hit and leave tim with a shitty pc store and not much else.

 

[InDaGulag]

Lol firmware ban. I remember that trick. Mix it with something intangible and game breaking lile freeing more ram from the system. There's lots of ways to fuck with Tim. And Fortnite isn't gonna last forever. Another flavor will hit and leave tim with a shitty pc store and not much else.

Yeah. Epic is doomed. It’s not like they own the most popular game engine with the Unreal Engine. C’mon people.

 

[reksveks]

Wasnt the bigger issue that MS was strong arming hardware manufacturers that they could not load other software esp browsers if they wanted to have windows on their machines? (Ie what google has been accused of doing but its slightly different in that they are not denying the OS they are denying the play store and what comes with it) That is fundamentally different than Apple who controls both the software AND the hardware.

I can't exactly remember the OEM terms that the prosecution raised as problematic but that was definitely an issue as well.

Google also denies the os once you have a forked version of Android or AOSP (not exactly sure which one) it seems.

 

[wolffy71]

It all comes down to the decision about which platform needs to allow open competition and which doesn't. Why would pc's, tablets, or laptops need to allow competition but not cell phones?

If the argument is you can just use an apple competitor why cant MS just say, use a windows competitor.

The reason is its bad for the market, consumers, economy, and innovation. Competition has to be allowed unless it would kill the product itself.

Consoles might have a tough argument. All they have is the survivability angle imo. They have a difficulty in saying they are only for video gaming.

 

[10101]

I’m not a fan of how Epic approached this at all, but I think common sense will prevail in the end. At least I hope it will, I don’t think there is an issue with walled gardens, I quite like them. No one held a gun to the head of the 1b iOS users or the 100m PlayStation owners, pretty sure they knew what they were getting into.

Tim wanting his own store on iOS is a joke. Apple spend a decade building up a user base and you think you should just be able to access it free of charge because “it’s a general purpose device”. Bollox.

 

[kuncol02]

Microsoft playing both sides of this:

Microsoft thumbs its nose at Apple with new “app fairness” policy

The software giant has picked a side, and it's with Epic and Spotify.

arstechnica.com

Haha bullshit MS...if your console is fundamentally different...so is the iPhone (the only company making the hardware/software end to end with no exceptions....so the iPhone is just as 'fundamentally different' as the consoles'

For clarity: I agree with Apple/Xbox/Sony/Nin...they created the hardware and software experience and should be able to control that access to their clientele.

You really don't understand? IPad and IPhone are general computing devices which are supposed to replace personal computers. It's Apple words not mine. Even this year they were advertising new iPad as "Your next computer". Consoles are not general computing devices. They have one role only. To play video games. You seriously don't see a difference?

 

[Kdad]

It all comes down to the decision about which platform needs to allow open competition and which doesn't. Why would pc's, tablets, or laptops need to allow competition but not cell phones?

If the argument is you can just use an apple competitor why cant MS just say, use a windows competitor.

The reason is its bad for the market, consumers, economy, and innovation. Competition has to be allowed unless it would kill the product itself.

Consoles might have a tough argument. All they have is the survivability angle imo. They have a difficulty in saying they are only for video gaming.

I disagree...it should come down to whether you control the hardware AND OS, and if you do, you shouldn't need to be an open platform unless you as a company choose to be open. If Apple was licensing it's OS to others to install on thier hardware then the argument becomes different...and those situations are PC and Android.

 

[ToadMan]

Also, just a thought but couldn't a platform holder charge a massive registration fee and have a very difficult registration process to get an App or other store on their hardware and just say no for any reason while still saying it is 'open'....

I think in this case they’d be open to legal action due to anti competitive practices.

Let’s say a new Nintendo console appears and Netflix and Microsoft want to put their subscription services on it.

Ninty can’t say yes to Netflix for $X registration while then charging MS a multiple of X that would make it prohibitively expensive.

MS would just go to court again and presumably with the precedent set from this Epic suit, win the next case.

That’s my guess anyway.

 

[Kdad]

You really don't understand? IPad and IPhone are general computing devices which are supposed to replace personal computers. It's Apple words not mine. Even this year they were advertising new iPad as "Your next computer". Consoles are not general computing devices. They have one role only. To play video games. You seriously don't see a difference?

1. Consoles do more than play games
2. Apple controls the hardware and software..so they can define it however they want imo because they are unique in this way. it is their complete product ,iOS and iPhone/iPad doesn't exist without the other.

Just like console hardware and console OS doesn't exist without the other.

So an iOS product might perform general computer functions but it's approach to this is unique in the industry and is more similar to the console approach. Were you clamoring for Windows RT to be opened up?

 

[ToadMan]

You really don't understand? IPad and IPhone are general computing devices which are supposed to replace personal computers. It's Apple words not mine. Even this year they were advertising new iPad as "Your next computer". Consoles are not general computing devices. They have one role only. To play video games. You seriously don't see a difference?

How you choose to classify devices like iPhone or iPad is irrelevant.

Apple produces the hardware and the o/s and offers additional paid services to its consumers.

It also allows third parties to sell products on its proprietary environment based on its terms and fees and through its storefront. 3rd parties agree to the terms when they put their product up for sale on the App Store.

Epic and MS are trying to hijack Apples work for their own gain by retrospectively changing the terms of the agreement they made willingly in the first place. They don’t care what the impact will be to the consumer - they want the ability to chase revenue without Apple’s oversight but use Apples proprietary hardware and o/s to do it.

The legality of it is clearly with Apple. MS and Epic are entitled to withdraw their products from the apple platform and see if the market follows them to other devices.

That is how a free market works. The problem is MS have failed on multiple occasions to even match apple, nevermind surpass them. So now they’re trying to get the courts to do what MS has been unable.

 

[Bryank75]

I think in this case they’d be open to legal action due to anti competitive practices.

Let’s say a new Nintendo console appears and Netflix and Microsoft want to put their subscription services on it.

Ninty can’t say yes to Netflix for $X registration while then charging MS a multiple of X that would make it prohibitively expensive.

MS would just go to court again and presumably with the precedent set from this Epic suit, win the next case.

That’s my guess anyway.

Maybe leave out the registration fee but just have them chase paperwork for a year till they get the message...if they are not wanted.

 

[The Pleasure]

Yeah. Epic is doomed. It’s not like they own the most popular game engine with the Unreal Engine. C’mon people.

An engine can easily drop out of favor in a generation. Idtech 3 for example was everywhere on pc and ps2/xbox/gamecube. Do you not remember?

 

[massivekettle]

The cleanest thing they could do is negotiate a preferential rate for Epic and get them to drop the whole thing.... but there is a risk others would find out and try the same thing.

Exactly. It’s why Apple is not budging with Epic otherwise it’ll set a precedent and open the floodgates for other third party service providers to ask Apple for side deals and then the 30pc cut is history.

An outside the box alternative I heard on Bloomberg would be for Apple to spin off the App Store into its own company, which could allow the store to keep its cut but would bring about its fair share of questions and problems for Apple (especially growth/profitability wise)

 

[Bryank75]

Exactly. It’s why Apple is not budging with Epic otherwise it’ll set a precedent and open the floodgates for other third party service providers to ask Apple for side deals and then the 30pc cut is history.

An outside the box alternative I heard on Bloomberg would be for Apple to spin off the App Store into its own company, which could allow the store to keep its cut but would bring about its fair share of questions and problems for Apple (especially growth/profitability wise)

I still think Apple will win especially when they see how much of Epic is owned by a Chinese company...

 

[massivekettle]

Exactly, that's what it's all about... getting Chinese software all over iOS and dominating all platforms by flooding them with software. Pushing their ideology etc.

Well it’s also related to Tencent’s own squabble (of a similar nature) with Apple a few years back regarding WeChat. Apple wanted a cut of in-app revenues but Tencent declined to share. Howeverx unlike Epic, Tencent has massive leverage in that WeChat is by far the most popular app in China (and used for almost anything) and as such Apple settled. Otherwise they would have risked losing the Chinese market, such is China’s addiction with the app.

 

[Kdad]

Well it’s also related to Tencent’s own squabble (of a similar nature) with Apple a few years back regarding WeChat. Apple wanted a cut of in-app revenues but Tencent declined to share. Howeverx unlike Epic, Tencent has massive leverage in that WeChat is by far the most popular app in China (and used for almost anything) and as such Apple settled. Otherwise they would have risked losing the Chinese market, such is China’s addiction with the app.

Thus why it is Tencent again involved, trying to leverage a popular app that Epic themselves say is a 'platform' and not just a game...its Tencent's thin edge

 

[massivekettle]

I still think Apple will win especially when they see how much of Epic is owned by a Chinese company...

I don’t think that will sway the courts, unless Epic’s partially Chinese ownership is deemed to pose a security risk for Apple’s ecosystem or US citizens.

Had Trump remained in power, I think there would have been an outside chance, but given Dems are keen to hit the reset button on the relationship with China I doubt this will factor in... but who knows...

 

[Sean Mirrsen]

The iPhone or iPad, the Switch, any of the Xboxes or Playstations, are fundamentally complete products. Or another terms I use, "integrated platforms".

The closest fundamental equivalent of this, is a home appliance, or a regular non-smart cellphone. The maker of the product provides you with hardware, which comes with its specific programming, functions and limitations. You can customize the functionality of the device within the parameters set by the manufacturer, occasionally by defining your own parameters for existing functions or unlocking functions of existing programs in the firmware, but going outside of those parameters would void your warranty and deny you the manufacturer's support.

With the iPhone/iPad and the consoles, the programming is more advanced. It allows customization to a greater degree, with entire additional software packages that can be downloaded from the internet or installed from disc, or otherwise introduced to the device. But you are still limited to the boundaries the manufacturer sets for you. Even if it is a "smart" device, like a personal computer would be, nothing mandates that the user should be able to go beyond the manufacturer's specified limits in customizing their device without losing the manufacturer's support.

Apple cornered the market on a complete smartphone product. Few other smartphones exist where the hardware and software are both designed by the same company to work together, inseparably. A PC, laptop, or generic Android phone or tablet is made up of parts by a dozen different manufacturers, has firmware made by one company, OS by another company, and middleware from another several dozen sources, all assembled by an OEM and put under a different branding altogether. Apple sources its more standard components too, but it's designing its own silicon, has its own components and technologies throughout their product, provides its own firmware, middleware, OS, and key software applications, all made to work together as one product under their own brand, a part of their own platform. The App Store is just a part of how you can customize your device, one of the many ways how you interact with that platform, and Apple's "walled garden" approach is perfectly natural within those bounds. And consoles are, largely, the same way - custom-designed hardware with only specific sourced components, custom firmware, middleware, and software, all by the same company. Complete products, fully integrated platforms, the exact opposite of the assortment of parts and coding that is your usual PC or non-Apple smartphone. You can't force them to work the same, without destroying the whole market segment they occupy.

 

[Bryank75]

I don’t think that will sway the courts, unless Epic’s partially Chinese ownership is deemed to pose a security risk for Apple’s ecosystem or US citizens.

Had Trump remained in power, I think there would have been an outside chance, but given Dems are keen to hit the reset button on the relationship with China I doubt this will factor in... but who knows...

Well that is the point...it is a security risk. Opening up a system like that, that now has Covid tracking systems etc etc... is just asking for trouble.