Apple Appeals Court-Mandated App Store Payment Rule Changes

[MacRumors]

As promised, Apple is appealing the contempt of court decision it was hit with last week in its ongoing legal fight with Epic Games. Apple today filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. District Court in Northern California, in the hopes that the Cupertino company might be able to walk back changes that have required it to allow developers to add links to external payment methods to apps.

Last Wednesday, Apple was handed a scathing order to immediately walk back all of its anti-steering policies in the United States. Apple was found to be in violation of a 2021 injunction that required it to let developers direct customers to third-party purchase options outside of apps.

The order initially came from the Apple vs. Epic Games lawsuit that primarily went in Apple's favor. Apple was found not to have a monopoly and largely won the case, but part of the ruling forced Apple to change some of its App Store rules. Apple did make updates, but it only allowed developers a single link to an external website in apps, and Apple also collected a 12 to 27 percent fee from purchases made on a website through an app.

The judge was not at all happy with how Apple decided to comply with the order, and in her ruling, she said that Apple picked the most anticompetitive option at every turn. As a result, she provided Apple with a detailed list of tweaks to make, and ordered Apple to implement them immediately. "Apple's continued attempts to interfere with competition will not be tolerated," read the order.

Apple changed its App Store rules last Thursday. Apple cannot prevent developers from adding links or buttons that direct customers to make purchases outside of the App Store, nor can it dictate how those buttons or links look. Apple also can't collect any fees for purchases made using external links in apps.

In a statement, Apple said that it strongly disagrees with the decision, but Apple was not able to hold off on implementing the new rules during the appeals process, so U.S. developers are able to direct customers to websites to make purchases as of now.

Spotify, Patreon, and others have already submitted app updates with links to make purchases on the web.

Except for confirming Apple's plan to appeal, the notice contains little info, so it's not yet clear what arguments Apple will present to try to convince the appeals court that the judge overseeing the case made a mistake. Apple will need to submit a brief with its legal argument, then Epic Games will have a chance to respond, after which Apple will be able to file a second brief. There could also be oral arguments, so we are looking at several more months before a final decision is made.

Article Link: Apple Appeals Court-Mandated App Store Payment Rule Changes

 

[vertsix]

Can't wait for the appeal to be denied!

 

[Chungry]

Can't wait for the appeal to be denied!

The sad thing is they basically won the first case but couldn't get out of their own greedy way and brought this down on themselves. If they'd complied in good faith for that one point they could've basically dictated the terms and they wouldn't be doing a hail Mary for the appeal. I doubt it will be successfully appealed and as a shareholder I'm irritated they couldn't listen to a voice of reason like Shiller. If this does impact services revenue it would actually be worth looking at Cook's replacement more seriously

 

[DelayedGratificationGene]

IMO this ruling is meaningless. All this fuss over nothing. No one is going to leave the walled garden which offers the utmost in security, ease of use and convenience to go to some 3rd party and keep adding in different subscriptions with all these passwords everywhere that you will soon forget you have and keep paying monthly fees. I don’t even want to talk about your financial info going everywhere too. Also with those commission savings do you think Epic is going to reduce prices for the consumer? No way! They are keeping all that profit so again why would the consumer ever leave? Plus let Epic get a taste of all the logistics and customer service expenses required. They’ll be running back to Apple. This ruling is a complete non event. Have a great day!

 

[Chungry]

IMO this ruling is meaningless. All this fuss over nothing. No one is going to leave the walled garden which offers the utmost in security, ease of use and convenience to go to some 3rd party and keep adding in different subscriptions everywhere that you will soon forget you have and keep paying monthly fees. I don’t even want to talk about your financial info going everywhere too. Also with those commission savings do you think Epic is going to reduce prices for the consumer? No way! They are keeping all that profit so again why would the consumer ever leave? Plus let Epic get a taste of all the logistics and customer service expenses required. They’ll be running back to Apple. This ruling is a complete non event. Have a great day!

I partially agree with the last part of that, let Epic see what it's like in the driver's seat. It's not as easy as Apple makes it look. But I think to claim there's any benefit or added security with Apple's system than any other system has been repeatedly proven out to be incorrect. From scam apps that prey on people with recurring charges and remain in the app store for years(!) to the toxic environment of the app store where the race to the bottom has discouraged many would-be devs from even taking part, there's quite a big footprint Apple needs to clean up there. And they haven't because status quo is generally profitable and their position is unassailable. This ruling won't change the vast majority of payments processed for any but perhaps the largest players on the store. In the end, Apple malicious actions will only hurt consumers. Whether for the short or long term we can't know yet

Edit to add: 3rd party stores in the EU hasn't been the Armageddon many hoped it would be

 

[diddl14]

Wonder how many apps will make subscriptions 15-30% cheaper on their own store now that the Apple 'tax' is gone?

 

[FSMBP]

Wonder how many apps will make subscriptions 15-30% cheaper on their own store now that the Apple 'tax' is gone?

I doubt any dev who said that will actually do that...

But also, this whole lawsuit is not a good look for Apple. I know all businesses are sketchy but with Apple purposely thinking of "scary" tactics to keep others in the App Store, they chip away at their image.

 

[Chungry]

Wonder how many apps will make subscriptions 15-30% cheaper on their own store now that the Apple 'tax' is gone?

Several I think. But how bad will Apple look if they overturn on appeal and go from nothing back to 30%. I believe they would based on their actions to date, reputation be damned

 

[darngooddesign]

The sad thing is they basically won the first case but couldn't get out of their own greedy way and brought this down on themselves. If they'd complied in good faith for that one point they could've basically dictated the terms and they wouldn't be doing a hail Mary for the appeal. I doubt it will be successfully appealed and as a shareholder I'm irritated they couldn't listen to a voice of reason like Shiller. If this does impact services revenue it would actually be worth looking at Cook's replacement more seriously

Yep. They even could have maintained a % fee based on actual costs, but they decided to be greedy.

 

[sw1tcher]

IMO this ruling is meaningless. All this fuss over nothing. No one is going to leave the walled garden which offers the utmost in security, ease of use and convenience to go to some 3rd party and keep adding in different subscriptions with all these passwords everywhere that you will soon forget you have and keep paying monthly fees.

If only someone would create an app that could manage all those paswords for us. They could even call it Passwords. That would solve that problem in an instant.

Plus let Epic get a taste of all the logistics and customer service expenses required. They’ll be running back to Apple. This ruling is a complete non event. Have a great day!

If Epic's going to run back to Apple, then this is a nothing burger, right? So why are you so upset?

 

[Chungry]

If only someone would create an app that could manage all those paswords for us. They could even call it Passwords. That would solve that problem in an instant.



If Epic's going to run back to Apple, then this is a nothing burger, right? So why are you so upset?

Imagine such an app! Maybe someday 🦄

 

[macfacts]

IMO this ruling is meaningless. All this fuss over nothing. No one is going to leave the walled garden which offers the utmost in security, ease of use and convenience to go to some 3rd party and keep adding in different subscriptions with all these passwords everywhere that you will soon forget you have and keep paying monthly fees. I don’t even want to talk about your financial info going everywhere too. Also with those commission savings do you think Epic is going to reduce prices for the consumer? No way! They are keeping all that profit so again why would the consumer ever leave? Plus let Epic get a taste of all the logistics and customer service expenses required. They’ll be running back to Apple. This ruling is a complete non event. Have a great day!

This is about app developers vs apple, not iPhone owners vs apple/app developers. You're free to start your own law suit, if you feel you are some how being wronged. You're free to stay in the walled garden.

 

[Art Mark]

While I am not opposed to the court's ruling, I find the designation of a 'monopoly' confusing. The X-Box is also a monopoly, yes? The Playstation store? What about Ford? What about Wallmart not accepting Applepay? I think it's a very slim slice indeed to claim a monopoly within a single companies product. And if this is upheld I see no reason why a lot of other companies couldn't be forced into a similar ruling.

 

[Pezimak]

Apple is going to lose this one, don’t even know why they bother wasting time with it. They were deliberately arrogant and ignorant of the Judge and their ruling and that will not go down well in any appeal process. And of course they have been accused of blatantly lying too in this case I think.

 

[spazzcat]

This is about app developers vs apple, not iPhone owners vs apple/app developers. You're free to start your own law suit, if you feel you are some how being wronged. You're free to stay in the walled garden.

You mean those devs that wouldn't even exist if it was for the iPhone or the App store ...

 

[Graphate]

While I am not opposed to the court's ruling, I find the designation of a 'monopoly' confusing. The X-Box is also a monopoly, yes? The Playstation store? What about Ford? What about Wallmart not accepting Applepay? I think it's a very slim slice indeed to claim a monopoly within a single companies product. And if this is upheld I see no reason why a lot of other companies couldn't be forced into a similar ruling.

Not a comment on the case or your conclusions, but this might be helpful (or not): not all monopolies are unlawful.

Apple is going to lose this one, don’t even know why they bother wasting time with it. They were deliberately arrogant and ignorant of the Judge and their ruling and that will not go down well in any appeal process. And of course they have been accused of blatantly lying too in this case I think.

There are two reasons you should want everyone to appeal: (a) it’s the right to be heard by another, neutral third party, in part, because it makes for a better system when written opinions are expected to be challenged; and, (b) if, there was an error made, its important to correct it. A quick skim of the eventual brief should make the error quite obvious.

The legal system is great for two things: (a) encouraging settlements, and (b) appealing rulings you disagree with.

 

[Chungry]

You mean those devs that wouldn't even exist if it was for the iPhone or the App store ...

That's an extreme position to take. They need each other. Conversely said: Apple would be nothing without an App Store filled with devs

 

[alexgowers]

In my assessment it's your device and should be allowed to run any software you choose from any source, this case doesn't go far enough. Hopefully the EU can make some laws stick and open the store front too.

 

[pamon]

its their legal and corporate responsibility to appeal it for shareholders since its lost revenue. but, its a horrible business practice that the courts are firing back at Apple and Timmy on. Just like the DMA in Europe, they wont give up a pretty penny in profits unless they have too. It 100% needs to go away, just saying.

 

[Hajj.david]

Apple is going to lose this one, don’t even know why they bother wasting time with it. They were deliberately arrogant and ignorant of the Judge and their ruling and that will not go down well in any appeal process. And of course they have been accused of blatantly lying too in this case I think.

They essentially have to. By appealing literally everything and anything it essentially shows parties that want to sue Apple that they will not capitulate under any circumstance. Any decent lawyer knows this is the game and it has to be done to protect itself from future lawsuits.

 

[Naraxus]

As well they should. Epic/Spotify seem to think they can get away with milking Apple's ip & decades of hard work/capital and not pay for it.

 

[thefrost]

You ain't gonna be so lucky Apple.

 

[bzgnyc2]

Plus let Epic get a taste of all the logistics and customer service expenses required. They’ll be running back to Apple.

With 200 million customers in their app store and $6 B revenue total, I think Epic has some idea about the logistics and cost of providing customer service. It's not like Apple is the only company that has have done retail.

This ruling is a complete non event. Have a great day!

It's not going to bankrupt Apple but it sure was embarassing. Plus the referral to the Justice department for potential criminal prosecution of one their executives for purjury won't help their credibility in any future court case.

 

[bzgnyc2]

You mean those devs that wouldn't even exist if it was for the iPhone or the App store ...

They would exist -- they'd just be working on other platforms.

 

[Chungry]

They would exist -- they'd just be working on other platforms.

Exactly. I'll never understand the position of the person you responded to. It's so obtuse and not rooted in reality.