Apple Files Appeal in Epic Games Lawsuit, Asks to Delay App Store Changes

[MacRumors]

Apple has opted to appeal the ruling meted out by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the Epic Games vs. Apple lawsuit back in September, and today filed a notice of appeal with the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

The Cupertino company is planning to appeal the ruling that would require it to change its App Store rules to allow developers to add in-app links to outside websites, which would pave the way for alternate payment options that do not require developers to use the in-app purchase system. While the appeal is ongoing, Apple has asked the court for a stay on the permanent injunction that requires it to implement those changes by December.

Apple asks the Court to suspend the requirements of its injunction until the appeals filed by both Epic and Apple have been resolved. The company understands and respects the Court’s concerns regarding communications between developers and consumers. Apple is carefully working through many complex issues across a global landscape, seeking to enhance information flow while protecting both the efficient functioning of the App Store and the security and privacy of Apple’s customers. Striking the right balance may solve the Court’s concerns making the injunction (and perhaps even Apple’s appeal itself) unnecessary. A stay is warranted in these circumstances.

In the original ruling, Rogers said that Apple's anti-steering rules prohibiting links to outside websites illegally stifle consumer choice. She prohibited Apple from restricting developers from including "in their apps and their metadata buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms."

At the time, she gave Apple 90 days to implement these changes, but Apple is asking to wait to make any updates to the App Store rules until all of the appeals in the case have wrapped up, which could take years as Epic Games has also filed an appeal.

According to Apple, making changes to the App Store rules could "upset the careful balance between developers and customers provided by the App Store," resulting in irreparable harm to Apple and consumers. Apple says that a stay will allow it to safeguard its platform while it works through "the complex and rapidly evolving legal, technological, and economic issues that any revisions to this Guideline would implicate."

Further, as grounds for appeal, Apple said that Epic Games barely mentioned the anti-steering claim during the trial, and offered no evidence that it was harmed by that particular App Store rule. Apple claims that it is likely to succeed on appeal, and that Epic will suffer no harm from a stay on the injunction. Apple also said that it is working on "enhancing information flow" without impacting the consumer, and that App Store changes could be coming that would eliminate the need for a permanent injunction at all.

Implementing the injunction on December 9 could have unintended downstream consequences for consumers and the platform as a whole. Apple is working hard to address these difficult issues in a changing world, enhancing information flow without compromising the consumer. A stay of the injunction would permit Apple to do so in a way that maintains the integrity of the ecosystem, and that could obviate the need for any injunction regarding steering.

The permanent injunction is currently scheduled to go into effect on December 9, but if Apple wins, it will not have to make changes at that time. Rogers is set to hear Apple's case on November 16. The full text of Apple's appeal can be read here.

The original lawsuit went largely in Apple's favor with the exception of the anti-steering injunction, with Apple calling it a "resounding victory." Epic Games has appealed the ruling and Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said that the judge's decision "isn't a win for developers or for consumers."

Article Link: Apple Files Appeal in Epic Games Lawsuit, Asks to Delay App Store Changes

 

[diddl14]

There goes hope for those developers that were thinking they could now finally point users to their own save payment portals...

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

Hope it’s denied.
Come on Apple, you came out of this looking good, don’t mess it up

 

[I7guy]

Apple is in this for blood, or so it seems. Their legal eagles, I'm guessing, think they have an appeal with some merit. Of course, there seems to be a lot riding on this particular point.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Delayed till next 5 years. Oh yeah!

 

[CWallace]

What about the Japanese and South Korea rulings? Are they also being appealed? As I understand it from media reports, while local in direct scope, they were said to effectively force Apple's hand worldwide and were more impacting than the Epic ruling.

 

[HiVolt]

This is pathetic, Apple.

 

[Bull 07]

Master move. Genius Apple.

 

[Realityck]

I don't think Apple will successfully appeal that part of the Epic vs Apple trial judgement. The fact that you can sign up for some VoD providers like Netflix on their web site and download the related app from the store shows they are already doing it.

 

[cmwade77]

I hope the appeals court tells Apple to go fly a kite.

 

[hoodafoo]

Wait, Apple said publicly it was pleased with the ruling, now it wants to appeal it??

 

[Realityck]

Perhaps Apple figures if Epic can appeal then they can appeal, doesn't mean either will win on appeal.

 

[Homme]

This is pathetic, Apple.

it’s not pathetic at all. Apple has a right to appeal in order to protect what it can gain most from the appeal

Wait, Apple said publicly it was pleased with the ruling, now it wants to appeal it??

they did say after the ruling that they will appeal that decision and wallah they did

 

[BootsWalking]

Apple is a long way from the 1984 commercial.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Late Friday news drop...

 

[dumastudetto]

Hope it’s denied.
Come on Apple, you came out of this looking good, don’t mess it up

If they can successfully overturn the tiny aspects of the ruling that went against them, that's a total and complete victory for Apple and us supporters. We should be cheering them on to victory. I know I am.

 

[turbineseaplane]

That sweet sweet IAP crack is hard to kick, ain't it Tim?

 

[Shirasaki]

Heh. Not surprising at all.
I’d be actually surprised if somehow apple caves in without cannibalising their own culture, tradition and pride.

 

[davidako]

According to Apple, making changes to the App Store rules could "upset the careful balance between developers and customers provided by the App Store," resulting in irreparable harm to Apple and consumers.

If the App Store is in a state where changes can lead to irreparable harm to consumers then Apple has definitely abused its position and needs regulating.

 

[Shirasaki]

If they can successfully overturn the tiny aspects of the ruling that went against them, that's a total and complete victory for Apple and us supporters. We should be cheering them on to victory. I know I am.

Not everyone want a giant mega corp to have total control of his/her life and determine what decision he/she should make.

In fact, people have been calling out breaking up these mega corps because they are way too powerful.

 

[gaximus]

My guess is they will try to make it so that you can link out of the app, but you will also have to have the option to purchase in app as well, and leave it to the user to decide. and then they will make it so that you can’t offer different Prices for in app and out of app.

Or, they might create an API that must be used so that they can keep track of how often this happens and will show the user a warning, that you are leaving the garden, and that apple won’t be able to help you if something goes wrong (no refunds or anything)

 

[davidako]

it’s not pathetic at all. Apple has a right to appeal in order to protect what it can gain most from the appeal

they did say after the ruling that they will appeal that decision and wallah they did

Should no one have to go to jail after being found guilty until they have exhausted all possible appeals processes either?

 

[Homme]

If the App Store is in a state where changes can lead to irreparable harm to consumers then Apple has definitely abused its position and needs regulating.

no Epic abused that position by its win in relation to that change considering that potential change to third party links outside the App Store could lead to links or sources of the kind which are unsecure leading to people taking advantage of one’s credit card details of a payment instead of a far more secure method like what we have now via the App Store

 

[Shirasaki]

and then they will make it so that you can’t offer different Prices for in app and out of app.

This is what I believe what happened during 2008 App Store debut. Developers really should just charge iOS users 30% more than on android. They pay more on the phone, so does everything else. Apple’s “you can’t offer different prices” ruling is the one that needs to be abolished.

 

[davidako]

My guess is they will try to make it so that you can link out of the app, but you will also have to have the option to purchase in app as well, and leave it to the user to decide. and then they will make it so that you can’t offer different Prices for in app and out of app.

Or, they might create an API that must be used so that they can keep track of how often this happens and will show the user a warning, that you are leaving the garden, and that apple won’t be able to help you if something goes wrong (no refunds or anything)

That would be completely illegal. Apple can’t withhold customers’ legal rights related to products and services just because someone paid with legal currency that Apple didn’t earn a percentage from.