Legal dispute with Epic Games: Apple considers App Store ruling too far-reaching
Epic Games wants freedom from the App Store, Apple fears for its own rights: Things continue to get heated in the appeal proceedings.
App Store and Epic Games Store icons: years of legal dispute, no end in sight.
(Image: Shutterstock/mundissima)
In the long-running lawsuit between Epic Games and Apple over Apple's App Store in the US, the iPhone company has come up with new arguments: Apple's lawyers have massively criticized the lower court's decision in the appeal proceedings. According to the filing, the ruling by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, which among other things forces Apple to allow alternative payment methods, contradicts the company's constitutional rights. In the letter to the competent United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, Apple claims, among other things, that the lower court has taken away the company's right to be remunerated for its intellectual property. This is a "dangerous precedent". Apple therefore also sees the fees incurred in the App Store as remuneration for its technical creations.
Apple questions legality
The 42-page letter, which is available to the Apple blog 9to5Mac, also states that Gonzalez Rogers' decision is "flawed", "overly broad" and ultimately "indefensible". Apple sees the fact that Epic Games is no longer to receive a commission for so-called linked-out purchases, i.e. purchases via its own payment channels, as a "permanent punishment" for Apple.
Videos by heise
It also cites a decision by the US Supreme Court on whether lower courts are allowed to make nationwide decisions at all. In Apple's view, Gonzalez Rogers' court would then have to "at least significantly limit" its order. What exactly that would mean remains unclear.
Freedom of expression threatened?
Furthermore, Apple's lawyers write that Gonzalez Rogers' order imposes "in meticulous detail new design and formatting requirements" for the App Store and even dictates the words that Apple may convey to its users on its own platform. These requirements constituted an impermissible extension and amendment of the lower court's order – rather than an attempt to enforce compliance with the original order.
They thus violated the First Amendment by forcing Apple to transmit messages to its clientele "with which it disagrees." The First Amendment concerns the right to freedom of expression, which companies in the USA also enjoy.
What the decision is about
At the end of April, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple could not prohibit Epic Games and other app providers from placing links on the web to offer in-app purchases. The company recently wanted up to 27 percent commission for this as well. Instead, Apple has to release the links and is not allowed to send warning dialogs in advance.
This has led to Spotify and Epic Games themselves submitting their apps with corresponding payment links. Fortnite by Epic Games is now back in the App Store in the USA. Although it contains in-app purchases from which Apple earns money, Epic's own payment system – is also more favorable for customers. There are also similar conflicts in other countries. For example, the EU Commission uses the Digital Markets Act to dictate to Apple exactly what the company may and may not do.
Empfohlener redaktioneller Inhalt
Mit Ihrer Zustimmung wird hier ein externer Preisvergleich (heise Preisvergleich) geladen.
Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass mir externe Inhalte angezeigt werden. Damit können personenbezogene Daten an Drittplattformen (heise Preisvergleich) übermittelt werden. Mehr dazu in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
(bsc)
