Apple Can't Delay App Store Fee Fight While Waiting on Supreme Court

[MacRumors]

Apple has again failed to earn a stay for fee calculations in its ongoing legal fight with Epic Games. Apple's case will be heard by the Supreme Court in the term that begins in October, and Apple asked the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to pause proceedings until then, but the court said no.

Apple now has 24 hours to give the court an outline of the fees it wants to charge developers for using alternative payment options and linking out to purchase options on the web. Epic Games will then be able to give a legal analysis of Apple's fee proposal, and the court will decide what's reasonable.

Apple's stay was denied! Now they have 24 hours to file their proposed menu of junk fees with The Court, and Epic will have 60 days to file our legal analysis in advance of a court hearing on the topic.— Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) August 11, 2026​

Fee calculations are the result of a long, drawn-out dispute between Epic Games and Apple, which started when Epic sued Apple in 2020. Apple largely won the initial legal fight, but was ordered to change its anti-steering rules to let developers link to non-App Store purchase options. Apple complied, but charged a 12 to 27 percent fee that resulted in few developers choosing to use the option.

Epic Games accused Apple of violating the court's order and U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers agreed. In April 2025, she found Apple in contempt of court for willfully violating her ruling, and stopped Apple from collecting any fees on links in the U.S. App Store.

Apple appealed, and the appeals court upheld the contempt ruling, but said Apple was entitled to reasonable fees for its intellectual property. The appeals court sent the case back to the district court to figure out what a reasonable fee might be. Apple has not been able to collect payment for link-outs since April 2025, and right now, there are no fees.

The appeals court ruling that continued to hold Apple in contempt led Apple to appeal to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Apple sought a pause on the fee calculations because the higher court's decision could undo the contempt ruling, but the appeals court, Supreme Court, and now the district court have denied Apple's pause requests.

The court will now determine a fee, and Apple will need to change its App Store rules to comply. The fee that's set in this legal battle could have implications well beyond the United States because Apple told the Supreme Court that regulators around the world are watching to see the outcome.

Article Link: Apple Can't Delay App Store Fee Fight While Waiting on Supreme Court

 

[Alfonson]

 

[lazyrighteye]

This guys is easily my least favorite Tim.

 

[germanbeer007]

Notice how barely anyone cares about sideloading when it's now available in certain areas?

 

[I_love_money]

Notice how barely anyone cares about sideloading when it's now available in certain areas?

I certainly don’t as I almost never download any apps.

 

[Keymaster]

First, Epic and Tim Sweeney suck, the way they have gone about this has been awful, and on principle they should be tossed out for how shady they have been through this whole process.

That said, it will be interesting to see what the court comes up with for a fee structure. They should have the information about what it would take to make the App Store profitable, and that's really a key factor...Apple has to make enough of a profit to support apps and a store, if they don't the whole thing shuts down. And, apps cost money at some level for all of the stuff Apple puts together to support them, even the absolutely free ones cost Apple in terms of software development, hosting, and bandwidth. Whether they are charging too much or not enough should become apparent after the court analysis...it will be highly amusing if the court determines that Apple should be charging more for the App Store and is absorbing some of its costs elsewhere, an outcome where Apple is told to raise its prices would be pretty ironic.

The argument over side loading shouldn't come into play for that part of it, that's an argument to open the iOS platform up to installations outside of Apple's control...there are so many bad things that could come out of it that the few good things for those of us that could do it securely really aren't worth it for Apple. Charges for in-app purchases should be looked at though...I'm not even going to try to guess at the most fair method for that, it's really complicated.

At least we'll get some closure on this soon, and perhaps this will then set a standard that all the other App Stores (including Epic's thing) can follow...we all know that other app stores are set up like Apple but have gotten a pass in a lot of this. The biggest question is if this benefits the consumer in the end...that's not why Sweeney took this on despite his protestations, and his ill intent just might turn out to cause more trouble for people once this is all settled.

 

[mansplains]

Notice how barely anyone cares about sideloading when it's now available in certain areas?

I’ve been sideloading for nearly a year in the US, where you have to use a dev account and renew weekly. I’ll take the minor inconvenience over switching back to the encrapified native YouTube app.

 

[I7guy]

Okay well Apple will have to change its fee structure until the court adjudicates the decision? And until then it may have to change or be forced to stay as it is forever?

 

[now i see it]

It’s enjoyable watching billionaires squabbling over money

 

[platinumaqua]

People are deciding good guys vs bad guys for each side, but really both side sucks in this particular issue. I know Epic is just trying to keep the cut for themselves and not going to lower their prices, but the anti-steering provisions and the technology fees for not using App Store payments on Apple's side leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

 

[coolfactor]

Sweeney is a weenie. But I do agree that junk fees need to be reined in. Banks have gotten away with that for decades.

If the primary cost to Apple is hosting and delivering apps and updates, why can't they just pass that directly onto developers that want to bypass the App Store for payments?

 

[coolfactor]

People are deciding good guys vs bad guys for each side, but really both side sucks in this particular issue. I know Epic is just trying to keep the cut for themselves and not going to lower their prices, but the anti-steering provisions and the technology fees for not using App Store payments on Apple's side leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

Apple invests $billions each year to deliver the technology (hardware and software). The App Store ecosystem was thoughtfully designed to avoid the mess we had with Windows and Mac software back in the 90s and early 2000s. It works. It helps to keep iPhone users safe.

Sure, it's also a money machine, but we all benefit.

It's unreasonable for a subset of developers to get all of that investment handed to them on a silver platter.

 

[Timpetus]

I’ve been sideloading for nearly a year in the US, where you have to use a dev account and renew weekly. I’ll take the minor inconvenience over switching back to the encrapified native YouTube app.

What YouTube app are you sideloading? I'd love a nice alternative, and I already use AltStore.

 

[Piggie]

27% far too much.

Apple will probably offer 26.9% as an alternative 😉

 

[Brother Cavil]

Apple invests $billions each year to deliver the technology (hardware and software).

And customers spend billions on that hardware. Investing in R&D is what companies do. What's your point?

The App Store ecosystem was thoughtfully designed to avoid the mess we had with Windows and Mac software back in the 90s and early 2000s. It works. It helps to keep iPhone users safe.

Do you seriously believe that nonsense??? I've been a Mac user since 1988 and Mac software was never a "mess" and certainly not since OS X launched.

How many scammy data-harvesting apps have been removed from the App Store after weeks, months, even YEARS of not being flagged? There's absolutely no way that Apple can truly assess each app without reviewing code. The whole App Store approval process is a lot of smoke and mirrors and theater so that Apple can charge their 30% tax.

Sure, it's also a money machine, but we all benefit.

Lol

It's unreasonable for a subset of developers to get all of that investment handed to them on a silver platter.

It's unreasonable and just gross for a multi-trillion dollar corporation that already has upward of 40% profit margins to look for even more ways to bleed their customers forever.

 

[Meatwad]

Just let everyone sideload. Let iOS become the crapshow that Android is. Apple should develop a legal shield that basically absolves them of any and all liability if you do that stuff, and their messaging should be "If you want to be secure, don't do this but idgaf get hacked".

 

[Meatwad]

It's unreasonable and just gross for a multi-trillion dollar corporation that already has upward of 40% profit margins to look for even more ways to bleed their customers forever.

1. Look up what "fiduciary duty" means.
2. You want permanent free stuff for buying hardware once? Bleat about margins all you want, but running the app store ain't free.

 

[Brother Cavil]

1. Look up what "fiduciary duty" means.
2. You want permanent free stuff for buying hardware once? Bleat about margins all you want, but running the app store ain't free.

The software industry was doing just fine before Apple decided it was going to bleed customers and developers forever. We didn't have 30% fees and we weren't restricted on where we could buy software until Apple magically invented this business model and its sycophants started rationalizing the obvious cash grab and censorship.

 

[DocMultimedia]

Sweeney shows his class. Toilet level at best.

 

[sw1tcher]

Just let everyone sideload. Let iOS become the crapshow that Android is. Apple should develop a legal shield that basically absolves them of any and all liability if you do that stuff, and their messaging should be "If you want to be secure, don't do this but idgaf get hacked".

It's funny how so many people say if users want to sideload, then Apple should not be held responsible for anything bad that happens (and which is totally fair). But they never argue for the opposite, that if users are forced to use Apple's App store and they are harmed in any way that Apple should be held responsible and be required to make the user whole.

Apple Responds to Lawsuit Over Fake Bitcoin Wallet Scam in App Store

Apple is facing a new lawsuit from three customers who allegedly lost a combined $1.8 million after falling victim to a fake Bitcoin wallet app in the App Store, according to a complaint filed in California federal court on Friday.

www.macrumors.com

 

[Black Belt]

Epic had no real platform to reach a gazillion customers. They could either retail through GameStop for 50% or the Apo Store for half that. And they cry like their entitled. Maybe they should spend all the lawyer money on development of decent games

 

[HaHaRich!]

I'm actually a bit surprised the District court didn't pause until the SCOTUS session. As I read, except for the 24 hour deadline to submit it's fee formulae (which Apple should already have had written up because they knew this was a possibility) a pause hurts Apple MORE because they continue to not collect any link out fees, and Rogers is sick of Apple's ****. If Apple really wants, they can petition SCOTUS for an emergency stay, but given the District court is in the 9th circuit under Justice Kegan, I don't imagine she'd intercede on Apple's behalf. Interesting because most cases where a little guy goes after a big guy in Intellectual property fights happen in Texas, and usually sides with the little guy, but that court is in the 5th circuit under Justice Thomas, and it's no secret Clarence can be bought with a movie ticket and a bag of Funyons.

 

[Brother Cavil]

It's funny how so many people say if users want to sideload, then Apple should not be held responsible for anything bad that happens (and which is totally fair). But they never argue for the opposite, that if users are forced to use Apple's App store and they are harmed in any way that Apple should be held responsible and be required to make the user whole.

Apple Responds to Lawsuit Over Fake Bitcoin Wallet Scam in App Store

Apple is facing a new lawsuit from three customers who allegedly lost a combined $1.8 million after falling victim to a fake Bitcoin wallet app in the App Store, according to a complaint filed in California federal court on Friday.

www.macrumors.com

Cognitive dissonance is real.

 

[jole]

Price list needing court approval 🤦🏻‍♂️

Epic who argues Apple product should be free and that a Apple needs to advertise their products for free. And then call Apple's price list "junk fees" even before seeing it 🤦🏻‍♂️

Have not given a penny to Epic since they started this mess. Never will.

 

[svish]

This battle between Epic and Apple is never ending. Waiting to see what will happen in the end.