Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster


Apple has lost a court battle to delay App Store changes while it asks the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on its long-running dispute with Epic Games surrounding developer fees.

app-store-blue-banner-epic-1.jpg

On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an earlier decision that had let Apple keep its current App Store commission structure in place while it appeals to the Supreme Court. The reversal means Apple now has to return to a lower court to work out what fees it can charge developers who steer customers to outside payment options.

Apple won the pause earlier this month by arguing that it shouldn't have to overhaul its fee structure twice if the Supreme Court ultimately ruled in its favor. In response, Epic Games immediately filed two motions: one said it hadn't been given time enough to prepare a response to Apple's stay request, and another asking the court to reject the original request.

The three-judge panel granted Epic's motion for reconsideration. The judges said Apple hadn't shown that the Supreme Court was likely to take the case, and pointed out that the high court already chose not to hear Apple's challenges once back in 2024. They also rejected Apple's claim that being forced into lower-court hearings would cause real harm.

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney shared the news in a post on X, adding that "Apple's delaying tactics have come to an end!"


The case now heads back to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in California, who will determine what commission Apple can collect on purchases made through external links, if any. Apple can still petition the Supreme Court while those proceedings move ahead.

The dispute traces all the way back to the original Epic Games trial, which Apple largely won. However, one exception was a 2021 ruling from Judge Gonzalez Rogers ordering Apple to relax its "anti-steering" rules and let developers point users to outside payment options.

Apple complied with the ruling, but only slightly lowered its fees, which led few developers to even bother adding links. Epic subsequently returned to court, and the judge found Apple in willful violation of the original injunction. Consequently, it barred Apple from collecting any commission on external links.

Apple appealed and dropped the link fees while the case moved forward, but the company argued that the ruling was unconstitutional and that it should receive compensation for its technology. Then in December 2025, the appeals court delivered a split decision: Apple had violated the injunction, but the company should still be able to charge something reasonable. That sent the question of what that fee should look like back to the district court.

Apple is now hoping the Supreme Court will go further and throw out the district court's ruling altogether.

Article Link: Epic Games Wins Reversal of Stay in App Store Fee Legal Battle
 
Can Tim Sweeney and Co. just go away?

This is the same guy that "summoned an army of 7 year olds" to help fight against Apple a few years back... what a joke 🤣
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Apple Mac Daz
If Epic ultimately get their way, it's quite simple what Apple will do. Permanently ban Epic as a developer from having an account. There is nothing illegal, about a business deciding to not accept the business of a customer.
I don't think Apple wants to deal with the negative outcome of that.

The entire AppStore eco system is dodgy enough as is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WarmWinterHat
If Epic ultimately get their way, it's quite simple what Apple will do. Permanently ban Epic as a developer from having an account. There is nothing illegal, about a business deciding to not accept the business of a customer.

Pretty sure Apple tried that and was forced to reinstate them.

I’m far from an expert but apparently they can’t just decide one company isn’t allowed to have a developer account simply because they don’t like them.
 
Imagine a judge getting to decide what commission fees a company gets to collect. Can we have them limit real estate commission or profits on prescriptions?
Seriously. This gives one person ("The case now heads back to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in California, who will determine what commission Apple can collect on purchases made through external links, if any.") enormous power to rewrite an entire structure of a company. Regardless of what people think about either company or the situation, it potentially has enormous implications for many companies.
 
Seriously. This gives one person ("The case now heads back to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in California, who will determine what commission Apple can collect on purchases made through external links, if any.") enormous power to rewrite an entire structure of a company. Regardless of what people think about either company or the situation, it potentially has enormous implications for many companies.
And to think this could’ve all been avoided….oh dear!
 
  • Like
Reactions: WarmWinterHat
Seriously. This gives one person ("The case now heads back to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in California, who will determine what commission Apple can collect on purchases made through external links, if any.") enormous power to rewrite an entire structure of a company. Regardless of what people think about either company or the situation, it potentially has enormous implications for many companies.
Maybe Apple shouldn’t have perjured themselves on the stand, forcing the judge to go nuclear as punishment.
 
I don’t understand this case. Someone please enlighten me. So the government (ie, a judge) can decide what Apple can or cannot charge developers? What is considered “reasonable” and by whom?

The way I see it, unless the DOJ deems Apple to be a monopoly, then the government should stay out of business decisions and let the market decide.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ursadorable
I don’t understand this case. Someone please enlighten me. So the government (ie, a judge) can decide what Apple can or cannot charge developers? What is considered “reasonable” and by whom?

The way I see it, unless the DOJ deems Apple to be a monopoly, then the government should stay out of business decisions and let the market decide.
When you are a gatekeeper for a large portion of the online economy you get regulated. Telecoms are regulated, power companies are regulated. Government tells companies how they can price things all the time if the industry is important or there are structural barriers to natural competition.
 
I've boycotted Epic for almost a decade now because they are a trash company, with zero ethics. Glad to see nothing has changed.
 
I want developers to be valued as stakeholders as much as Mr Crook values shareholders. Honestly, the iPhone would be worthless without apps built by developers.
And Epic wants large developers to be valued more than small developers. This whole thing started because Epic wanted better terms than the same ones they’d give a developer with one app.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.