Interviews and news

Latest News U.S. Supreme Court denies appeals from Apple and Epic to Dismiss an Antitrust case -

Jan 28, 2024

On January 16, on the 16th day of January on January 16th The U.S. Supreme Court denied appeals brought by Apple and Epic Games concerning the antitrust lawsuit Epic had brought against Apple in 2020. Reuters reported.

In 2021 U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers did not take note of all of Epic's complaints against Apple but she ruled against Epic's policy against those developers who permit users to choose not to use the Apple platform for purchasing digital items. And in 2023, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed with much of Judge Rogers 2021 decision.

What does Apple Consider? Apple has responded

According to the reports The Associated Press reported that this will remove the power of the decision and provide developers the possibility of selecting several payment options. Apple has submitted court papers on January 16th which outline the company's plans to adhere to the decision while preserving the bulk of their fees.

AP added the court filing of Apple suggests Apple's intent to:

  • Developers may use hyperlinks in order to connect to other websites. However, Apple charges 12%-27 percentage commissions on transactions that are made through links to other sites.
  • Make sure you warn customers by displaying the "scare screen" in the event that they click the link which directs users to another payment option. Also, inform them that Apple doesn't have the responsibility to handle transactions in relation to privacy or security.
  • Institute an application process to approval which AP describes as "potentially complicated" prior to allowing externally-pointing hyperlinks or buttons to show up in iPhone or iPad applications. Apple's "effort to reduce fraudulent activity fraudulent activities, false information, and fraud." data."

   How Epic Games is reacting  

AP reported that the report which detailed the plans mentioned above "provoked accusations that Apple did business in bad faith, and created the stage for a further controversy regarding legal matters," apparently quoting Epic Games Chief Executive Chief Executive Officer Tim Sweeney's X (formerly called Twitter) Tweet which stated "Apple used a fake "compliance" strategy to gain an order from the District Court."

Sweeney continued to provide a lengthy list of "glaring issues we've encountered previously," concluding with " Epic will challenge Apple's low-quality compliance policy at District Court" as well alongside the addition of an image of the "scare screens" Apple has included in the Developer Support Update on the hyperlinks that allow you to buy products from other sources.

The morning of Tuesday, Sweeney had posted mixed views, noting that an appeal against the Supreme Court choosing not to take appeals into consideration in this case was "A horrible outcome for all developers" However, he said the fact that " developers can begin taking advantage of their rights to be a judge at a court, to tell US consumers about cheaper prices when they shop online."

HTML0 More Epic Games v. Apple Case Developments

On January 17th the 17th of January Reuters said that Apple had also asked the judge to order Epic Games pay them over $73 million in legal fees as well as other expenses. Reuters says that the demand is based on "a lower court's ruling where it was determined in the court that Epic Games violated a developer agreement that it had signed in the year 2010," in which "Epic pledged to cover expenses to pay for legal and financial costs as well as additional costs in case of an infringement."

   about  

The article was first posted on this site

Article was first seen on here