The News: U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Appeals From Apple as well Epic in Antitrust Case -
On Tuesday, January 16 on the 16th of January, the U.S. Supreme Court denied requests to listen to appeals filed by Apple and Epic Games regarding the antitrust case Epic brought in 2020 against Apple in 2020, Reuters reported.
In 2021 U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected most of Epic's allegations against Apple however, she ruled against Epic's policy against developers sending customers away from Apple's network to purchase digital goods. Then in 2023 the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed with much of Judge Rogers' 2021 decision.
What is the way Apple Responds
The Associated Press reported that this removes the hold of an order to give devs more freedom to use other payment options. Apple also filed court documents late on 16 January in which it outlines its plan to comply with the court order and still preserve the bulk of their costs.
AP reported that Apple's court filing indicates that they plan to:
- Developers are allowed to make use of hyperlinks that point to other websites however, Apple charges 12%-27 percentage commissions on transactions via links to external websites.
- Warn consumers using an "scare screen" if they click a link pointing them to an alternate payment option, notifying them that Apple is not liable for those purchases regarding privacy or security.
- Institute an approval process which AP calls "potentially difficult" prior to allowing externally-pointing links or buttons to appear within iPhone or iPad apps, citing Apple's "effort to limit fraudulent activities, frauds, and misinformation."
How Epic Games Are Insisting
AP noted that the document outlining the above plans "provoked claims that Apple has acted in bad faith and set the scene for further litigious disputes," apparently quoting Epic Games chief executive Tim Sweeney's X (formerly known as Twitter) tweet stating "Apple submitted a false 'compliance' plan for the District Court's injunction."
Sweeney followed up with the list of "glaring issues we've discovered in the past," concluding with " Epic will challenge Apple's bad-faith compliance plan at District Court" as well as attaching an image of a "scare screen" Apple has included in its Developer Support update regarding purchases made via external links.
On Tuesday morning, Sweeney had posted mixed opinions, noting it was "unpleasant" that it was 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 using their right as a court judge to notify US customers about better rates on the internet."
Further Epic Games v. Apple Case Developments
The 17th of January, on the 17th of January, Reuters reported that Apple also asked the court on Tuesday for Epic Games pay them over $73 million in legal costs and other expenses. Reuters says that Apple's request stems from "a earlier court decision which said Epic Games violated a developer agreement it signed in 2010," in which "Epic committed to covering losses, legal fees, and other costs for any violations."