The News: U.S. Supreme Court rejects appeals from Apple as well Epic to Reject an Antitrust Case -
The 16th of January, 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 brought in 2020 against Apple at the end of 2020. Reuters reported.
In 2021, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers dismissed the majority of Epic's allegations 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 purchase digital goods. In 2023, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed with much of Judge Rogers' 2021 decision.
How Apple is Responding
The Associated Press reported that this removes the hold of an order to give devs greater freedom to utilize alternative payment options. Apple was also able to file court documents late on the 16th of January that outline its plans to comply with the court order and still preserve the bulk of their fees.
AP continued that Apple's Tuesday court filing indicates that they plan to:
- Allow developers to use hyperlinks that point to other websites However, Apple charges 12%-27 percent commission on payment via links to external websites.
- Inform consumers via an "scare screen" when they click on a link pointing users to an alternative payment option, notifying them that Apple is not liable to those transactions in regards to privacy or security.
- Institute an approval process which AP says is "potentially difficult" before allowing external-pointing links or buttons to show up within iPhone or iPad apps, citing Apple's "effort to minimize fraudulent activities, frauds, and misinformation."
What Epic Games is Reacting
AP noted that the document that outlines the plans "provoked accusations that Apple has acted in bad faith, and sets the stage for future legal sparring," apparently quoting Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney's X (formerly also known as Twitter) tweet stating "Apple has filed a 'compliance' in bad faith program to obtain the District Court's order."
Sweeney followed up with an extensive list of "glaring difficulties we've identified so far," concluding with " Epic will contest Apple's compliance scheme in bad faith at District Court" as well as the attachment of an image the "scare screen" Apple has included in the Developer Support Update regarding external purchase links.
The previous day, Sweeney had posted mixed sentiments, noting that the Supreme Court choosing not to take appeals on this matter was "A tragic outcome for all developers" while pointing out " developers can begin taking advantage of their rights as judged by the court to notify US clients about cheaper prices when they shop online."
More Epic Games v. Apple Case Developments
On Wednesday, January 17, Reuters reported that Apple also asked the court on Tuesday to have Epic Games pay them over $73 million in legal fees and additional costs. Reuters says that Apple's request is based on "a lower court's ruling which said Epic Games violated a developer agreement they signed in 2010," in which "Epic was required to pay for the costs of legal, losses, and other costs for any breach."