outsourceeasilycom Blog

The Latest: U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear appeals filed by Apple and Epic in Antitrust Case -

Jan 28, 2024

On January 16, on January 16 in the 16th day of January The U.S. Supreme Court denied the appeals filed by Apple as well as Epic Games regarding the antitrust lawsuit Epic filed for 2020 versus Apple in 2020. Reuters reported.

In 2021 U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected the majority of Epic's argument against Apple but she did decide in favor of Epic's rules against developers that allow users to leave Apple's platforms to make digital purchase. In 2023 the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed with much of Judge Rogers 2021 decision.

What do you think Apple Does? Apple Responds

According to the reports of the Associated Press reported that this is a release of an order giving developers more freedom in using various payment methods. Apple could also be allowed to file court papers on January 16 that outline the company's strategies to follow the decision while also retaining the fees.

AP has reported that the court filing of Apple suggests they are planning to:

  • Developers are allowed to make hyperlinks to websites that link to other websites. But, Apple charge 12% to 27 percent for commission the payment made via links that link to other websites.
  • Inform consumers via a "scare screen" when they click on the link, which will direct them to an alternate method of payment, as well as inform consumers that Apple is not responsible to those transactions in regards to security or privacy.
  • Institute the procedure to apply to obtain pre-approval, which AP calls "potentially complex" before allowing external-pointing buttons or hyperlinks to be displayed in iPhone or iPad apps. Apple's "effort to minimize the risk of scams, fraud and misinterpretation."

What's it about? Epic Games is Insisting

AP reported that the news report detailing the plans mentioned above "provoked claims of Apple doing business in bad trust, setting the stage for the legal battles that are to follow," apparently quoting Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney's X (formerly also known as Twitter) blog entry in which he wrote "Apple filed a bad-faith 'compliance plan' to get the order of the District Court."

Sweeney has also shared a lengthy description of "glaring problems we've encountered in the past," concluding with " Epic will challenge Apple's compliance plan in a bad faith case before District Court" and attaching an image of "scare display" Apple has included in the Developer Support update an external purchase hyperlink.

In the morning of Tuesday, Sweeney had posted mixed opinions, expressing his disappointment about an "shocking" decision made by the Supreme Court choosing not to accept appeals in the case was "A tragic result for all developers" however, he praised that " developers can begin taking advantage of their rights as judged by the court to inform US consumers about better costs on the internet."

HTML0 More Epic Games v. Apple Case Developments

On the 17th of January Reuters announced that Apple had also asked the judge on Tuesday to make Epic Games pay them over $73 million in legal expenses as well as other expenses. Reuters says that Apple's request was prompted by "a lower court ruling that found that Epic Games had violated a developers agreement that they had signed in the year 2010," in which "Epic committed to paying for legal, losses, and other costs for any violation."

   About  

The article was published on this site

Article was first seen on here