It did, but Apple might have been able to prevent Epic from having standing to sue by giving them an exception.

I imagine that could have hurt their case if Epic was always going to sue anyways.

I imagine it would have hurt their case if someone else, say Unity Technologies, sued. I really do think that Epic would have failed on the standing argument and not have even gotten to the fact finding stage of the trial where it could hurt their case.

On the claim that Epic won, the courts finding on standing is already "just barely"

> Thus, although the question is close, the Court finds that Epic Games has standing to bring a UCL claim as a quasi-consumer, not merely as a competitor.