With the recent ruling of Apple vs. Epic Games, there are MASSIVE similarities between these cases.
Core Issue: Market Dominance + Restrictive Monetization = Monopoly Behavior
- FiveM has a de facto monopoly on modded GTA V servers — alt : v exists but has a negligible user base by comparison.
- Rockstar/Take-Two acquiring FiveM essentially cemented that dominance by bringing the biggest modding platform under the control of the IP holder.
- Tebex exclusivity, enforced via FiveM’s ToS, then uses that monopoly power to restrict third-party monetization, which could mirror the kind of anti-competitive tying behavior Apple was just penalized for.
Legal/Policy Parallels from Apple v. Epic
- FiveM restricts fair market competition by banning third-party monetization tools.
- Tying Tebex to FiveM’s platform use mirrors the “anti-steering” behavior Apple was found guilty of — especially harmful to small, community-run servers that rely on donations.
- This setup, combined with FiveM’s market dominance, opens the door to regulatory scrutiny, especially in jurisdictions like the EU.
Final Thoughts
This isn’t just about one payment processor — it’s about fairness, competition, and the long-term health of the FiveM community. The Apple v. Epic ruling shows that even the biggest platforms can be held accountable. If FiveM wants to foster an open, creator-driven ecosystem, it’s time to revisit these policies before regulators do it for them.
Discussion is welcome — especially from server owners and developers affected by this.
I understand your concern and I kinda share it (as a creator myself).
Would love to be able to use different monetization platforms (or my own at some point). What I am missing is a sort of collection of all stores on Tebex. There is no form of advertising whatsoever unless you do it yourself on all sorts of social media. You cannot discover a store by yourself through Tebex, there is simply no list of available stores. The store needs to advertise itself, be it on the forums, youtube etc.
However I would not consider this similar. This is not one company versus another. This is just R*. They don’t have a dispute with Tebex (as far as we know) and they chose to keep Tebex as their preferred platform (for now, who knows what the future holds (maybe something similar to e.g. Bethesda Creation Club?)).
It is not like they don’t have a choice in the matter like Epic vs Apple where Epic had no choice other than to use Apple’s marketplace.
Not saying this could not lead to legal trouble, just pointing it out.
Edit: Just realised I had a fuckup reading your post.
Of course this would be “us as creators” vs R*, not R* vs R*… I see your point better now 
Strangely, from enforcement I’ve seen in releases, the huge marketplace for commission work, ko-fi, etc, this seems to be a misconception that Tebex is the sole platform allowed to be used for monetization.
A lot of what we “understand” about FiveM is because “compliance” in FiveM is basically done through word of mouth and there’s absolutely no transparency or clear documentation for us to follow. It’s basically just do X until you’re punished for doing X.
As I’ve understood, selling assets outside of Tebex is allowed - there’s no recourse or protectino for you if your assets are “leaked”. Maybe I’m wrong, but we have almost no way to check.
Even going through Tebex TOS, there’s a couple things you are strictly not allowed to use Tebex for (“donations” or contributions that aren’t linked to a purchase/asset) but who knows if that’s true or not.
Unless some court or consumer agency forces them to change, I don’t think we’ll see anything change with the current state unfortunately.