Apple Appeals Epic Games Ruling Over 'Anti-Steering' Provisions to U.S. Supreme Court

[MacRumors]

Just a day after Epic Games appealed one portion of its legal dispute with Apple to the U.S. Supreme Court, Apple has now done the same for the portion that was ruled in Epic's favor, reports Bloomberg.

The dispute between Apple and Epic dates back to 2020 with Epic seeking to overturn Apple's App Store rules requiring content purchases within iOS apps to go through Apple, which takes a 15% to 30% cut of the revenue.

In multiple rounds of the dispute, Apple has won on every count with the exception of one regarding Apple's "anti-steering" rule that bars developers of many iOS apps from directing users to methods of purchase available outside of the App Store, circumventing Apple's revenue cut.

Apple had said it was considering appealing the ruling over its anti-steering provision to the Supreme Court, and back in July a judge ruled that Apple did not have to make changes to its policies pending the potential appeal, which has now been filed.

The Supreme Court will decide in the coming months whether it will hear either or both of Epic's and Apple's appeals, but if it does not take up either petition, the previous rulings will stand. Apple would be able to continue to disallow third-party payment processing within apps but would have to allow developers to inform users about other purchasing options outside of the App Store.

Article Link: Apple Appeals Epic Games Ruling Over 'Anti-Steering' Provisions to U.S. Supreme Court

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

It's the trial that never ends~
It goes on and on my friend~

 

[a m u n]

OPS! Epic Games laying off 16% of staff.

 

[omihek]

It would be hilarious if the Supreme Court decided to hear only Apple's appeal and not Epic's

 

[bigjnyc]

damn I'm shocked that Epic has stood their ground this long... I don't even want to know how many millions and millions of dollars they've lost in potential revenue the last 3 years..... Getting kids playing and buying V-bucks on millions of iphones and ipads has to be significant. I mean they've made $0 from iOS users.... when they could have been making 70% of who knows how many millions.... Seems like business malpractice at the top due to stubbornness.

 

[erikkfi]

I hope my preferred, soulless giant corporation prevails in this fight over the other side's preferred, soulless giant corporation.

 

[Analog Kid]

I have to imagine the Supreme Court has more pressing matters on the docket. Anyone know if there's a Justice with a teenage boy pushing them to hear this case?

 

[alexe]

I hope Epic wins this in the end. I'm not an Epic fan at all, but Apple is way too big to behave the way it behaves and is definitely stifling competition and innovation at this point.

Taking a 30% cut of every mobile platform transaction when you're one out of two mobile platforms, the other of which is doing the exact same thing, is outrageous.

Google and Apple are enjoying a pseudo-competitive situation, in reality there's no competition and it's an implicit cartel. A duopoly is not a competitive situation, there is absolutely zero pricing pressure on either company because they both know they are the only two platforms available and too big and established for anybody else to have a chance to enter the ring.

I really don't understand why everybody is rooting for Apple so badly on this topic, it's a classical case of consumers rooting against their own interests.

You do realize it's you, the consumer, who ends up paying those 30% extra, right? It's not Epic or Spotify or any other company. It's the consumer for whom things are more expensive, only for the most valuable company in the world to become even richer.

Whether or not you like Epic is beside the point. You can still hate Epic, and of course they are fighting this fight for selfish reasons, but they just happen to be the only ones stepping up to challenge Apple to adopt more consumer-friendly App Store practices, so we should all be thankful for that.

 

[JimmyHook]

I hope Epic wins this in the end. I'm not an Epic fan at all, but Apple is way too big to behave they way it behaves and is definitely stifling competition and innovation at this point.

Taking a 30% cut of every mobile platform transaction when you're one out of two mobile platforms, the other of which is doing the exact same thing, is outrageous.

Google and Apple are enjoying a pseudo-competitive situation, in reality there's no competition and it's an implicit cartel. A duopoly is not a competitive situation, there is absolutely zero pricing pressure on either company because they both know they are the only two platforms available and too big and established for anybody else to have a chance to enter the ring.

I really don't understand why everybody is rooting for Apple so badly on this topic, it's a classical case of consumers rooting against their own interests.

You also just described the video game console market. And several other existing markets. Generally, if you develop a platform, you own the rules.

 

[sw1tcher]

I really don't understand why everybody is rooting for Apple so badly on this topic, it's a classical case of consumers rooting against their own interests.

1) Apple is never in the wrong. Ever.
2) Defend Apple no matter what.

 

[iSRS]

It's the trial that never ends~
It goes on and on my friend~

This is the second time this week that this song (the original) is now stuck in my head.

Thanks for that. 🤣

 

[ghostface147]

SCOTUS usually only listens to cases if there is are differing rulings over a few courts. In this case, Apple has been the benefactor in most of the cases, so I doubt they'll take up the case. Then again, who knows what the SCOTUS does these days.

 

[CarAnalogy]

Apple would be able to continue to disallow third-party payment processing within apps but would have to allow developers to inform users about other purchasing options outside of the ‌App Store‌.

Honestly this is the correct ruling. I doubt the Supreme Court will hear either argument.

 

[bunty]

Taking a 30% cut of every mobile platform transaction

But isn't that a false statement?

Apple Drops App Store Fees to 15% for All Developers Making Under $1 Million From App Store

Apple today announced the launch of a new App Store Small Business Program that will see the Cupertino company lowering its App Store fees for small...

www.macrumors.com

Apple announces App Store Small Business Program

New developer program accelerates innovation and helps small businesses and independent developers propel their businesses forward on the App Store.

www.apple.com

"New program reduces App Store commission to 15 percent for small businesses earning up to $1 million per year"

 

[alexe]

You also just described the video game console market. And several other existing markets. Generally, if you develop a platform, you own the rules.

But it matters how big you are and how essential the service is that you provide. That's why different regulations apply to electricity providers than for confetti manufacturers.

Fifteen years ago we might not have been at a point where mobile phones were so essential to people's lives that applying regulation would have been justified, but today they are.

Once a large enough fraction of society depends on something to a high enough degree, the companies providing that something can no longer be allowed to do just whatever they please.

You pretty much need a cell phone in today's world, at least the vast majority of people does. And developers need to make software for mobile phones because it's the largest part of the software market. Now if there's something that you need, but where you can only decide between two providers who both dictate the exact same conditions, then there is no actual competition and you are entirely powerless, right? That's where regulation comes in to help you as a developer or as a consumer.

That's where the video game console market is way different from the mobile phone market. Nobody needs video game consoles.

 

[cocky jeremy]

OPS! Epic Games laying off 16% of staff.

You love to see it.

 

[GMShadow]

I hope Epic wins this in the end. I'm not an Epic fan at all, but Apple is way too big to behave the way it behaves and is definitely stifling competition and innovation at this point.

Taking a 30% cut of every mobile platform transaction when you're one out of two mobile platforms, the other of which is doing the exact same thing, is outrageous.

Google and Apple are enjoying a pseudo-competitive situation, in reality there's no competition and it's an implicit cartel. A duopoly is not a competitive situation, there is absolutely zero pricing pressure on either company because they both know they are the only two platforms available and too big and established for anybody else to have a chance to enter the ring.

I really don't understand why everybody is rooting for Apple so badly on this topic, it's a classical case of consumers rooting against their own interests.

You do realize it's you, the consumer, who ends up paying those 30% extra, right? It's not Epic or Spotify or any other company. It's the consumer for whom things are more expensive, only for the most valuable company in the world to become even richer.

Whether or not you like Epic is beside the point. You can still hate Epic, and of course they are fighting this fight for selfish reasons, but they just happen to be the only ones stepping up to challenge Apple to adopt more consumer-friendly App Store practices, so we should all be thankful for that.

Do you actually believe that prices would drop by 30% if the fee were eliminated?

Do you believe stores should be forced to sell products for free?

 

[laptech]

Epic would win this if it was in the EU courts because there is no way the EU would allow Apple to prevent app developers from telling their customers there are other payment options that are available outside of the app.

Apple are showing just how despicable they are telling app developers they are not allowed to tell their users that other payment options exist outside of the app. This is Apple trying to strong arm app developers in preventing anyone from knowing other payment options exist.

Price comparison websites in the UK and the EU got caught out by doing something similar by not allowing all the best deals to show even though they existed. They got told to stop and to show ALL the deals and if they didn't they were told they would be fine and or refused to operate in the UK and EU.

 

[alexe]

Do you actually believe that prices would drop by 30% if the fee were eliminated?

Do you believe stores should be forced to sell products for free?

First of all, nobody suggested going from 30% to free, right?

Second, we're talking about a type of store here of which there exist exactly two to serve the entire planet. Clearly, you will understand that Apple has a different kind of market power that it can abuse than some local grocery store chain, right?

It's all a matter of a company's size and the amount of market power it has. The more market power a company has and the more essential the company's products are to people's lives, the more regulation is needed to make sure consumers are protected. Does that not make sense?

Regulation is not a binary thing. It's not between either Apple charges whatever it likes on all iOS transactions or isn't allowed to charge anything at all. It's a spectrum, and good regulation seeks to find a sensible point on that spectrum that both protects consumers and doesn't unreasonably constrain Apple and makes sure competition can still flourish.

 

[GMShadow]

First of all, nobody suggested going from 30% to free, right?

Second, we're talking about a type of store here of which there are exactly two to serve the entire planet. Clearly, you will understand that Apple has a different kind of market power that it can abuse than some local grocery store chain, right?

It's all a matter of a company's size and the amount of market power it has. The more market power a company has and the more essential the company's products are to people's lives, the more regulation is needed to make sure consumers are protected. Does that not make sense?

Regulation is not a binary thing. It's not between either Apple charges whatever it likes on all iOS transactions or isn't allowed to charge anything at all. It's a spectrum, and good regulation seeks to find a sensible point on that spectrum.

Other stores also take 30%. It's not just Apple and Google. Steam takes 30%. The consoles take 30%. It's almost like there's a general idea of what to take, and Apple didn't just pull the number out of thin air.

 

[bluespark]

Minor quibble, but EPIC has no current right of appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. What it has done is to petition the Court to entertain an appeal, a process known as filing a petition for certiorari. If the Court declines the petition, there is no appeal and the lower court ruling becomes final.

 

[jz0309]

Ok, so an end is in sight… finally

 

[iPay]

Who rules the world, cats or lawyers? now we know...

 

[gatorvet96]

Other stores also take 30%. It's not just Apple and Google. Steam takes 30%. The consoles take 30%. It's almost like there's a general idea of what to take, and Apple didn't just pull the number out of thin air.

...and you can't side-load or use alternate store/in-app on an XBOX or Playstation

 

[alexe]

Other stores also take 30%. It's not just Apple and Google. Steam takes 30%. The consoles take 30%. It's almost like there's a general idea of what to take, and Apple didn't just pull the number out of thin air.

Do you simply not want to understand the argument that it's about size and about how essential the provided products and services are? I couldn't have written it any clearer. Steam or console makers are way, way, way smaller than Apple, and provide services that are way less essential to society.