The News: U.S. Supreme Court rejects appeals from Apple as well Epic In Antitrust Case -

Jan 22, 2024

On Tuesday, January 16 on the 16th of January, the U.S. Supreme Court denied requests to listen to appeals filed by Apple as well as Epic Games regarding the antitrust litigation Epic has filed in 2020 against Apple for 2020. Reuters reported.

In 2021, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers denied the bulk of Epic's arguments against Apple however she did rule in Epic's favor regarding Apple's guidelines against developers allowing users to go out of Apple's systems to make digital purchases. Then in 2023, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed with much of Judge Rogers 2021 ruling.

 What Does Apple Think? Apple Responds

It was reported that the Associated Press reported that this is a release of an order to give devs greater freedom to utilize alternative payment options. Apple was also able to file court papers on January 16 which outline the company's plans to comply with the order while still preserving most of the fees.

AP reported that Apple's court filing suggests they are planning to:

  • Allow developers to use hyperlinks to websites that link to external sites However, Apple charges 12%-27 percent commission on payment through links to other websites.
  • Warn consumers using a "scare screen" if they click the link that directs them to an alternate payment method, and inform them that Apple is not responsible to those transactions in regards to security or privacy.
  • Institute an application process for pre-approval that AP describes as "potentially cumbersome" before allowing external-pointing links or buttons to show up within iPhone or iPad apps, citing Apple's "effort to minimize the risk of fraud, scams and confusion."

 How Epic Games is Insisting

AP reported that the paper detailing the above-mentioned plans "provoked accusations that Apple was acting in bad faith, and sets the stage for future legal sparring," apparently quoting Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney's X (formerly known as Twitter) blog post stating "Apple filed a bad-faith 'compliance plans to obtain the District Court's order."

Sweeney later outlined an extensive list of "glaring problems we've found to date," concluding with " Epic will contest Apple's compliance scheme in bad faith at District Court" and attaching an image of the "scare screens" Apple has included in its Developer Support update on the external purchase link.

Earlier on Tuesday, Sweeney had posted mixed sentiments, noting his displeasure with there was a "shocking" decision by the Supreme Court choosing not to hear appeals in this case was "A tragic outcome for all developers" however, he also noted that " developers can begin exercising their court-established right to inform US consumers about lower rates on the internet."

 More Epic Games v. Apple Case Developments

On the 17th of Jan, Reuters reported that Apple also asked the judge on Tuesday to make Epic Games pay them over $73 million in legal costs and other costs. Reuters states that Apple's request was prompted by "a lower court ruling in which it was found that Epic Games violated a developer agreement it signed in 2010," in which "Epic committed to covering losses, legal fees, and other costs for any violation."

 About