2023-09-28 18:02:22
After Epic Games ask the United States Supreme Court to review the decision on the Apple violating antitrust laws, as we reported yesterday, Maçã filed another appeal, related to another part of the sentence handed down in 2021.
It is worth remembering that this dispute has been going on since 2020when the developer added it to the game Fortnite an option to make purchases outside the App Store system, which culminated in the game’s removal from the store.
In the 2021 decision, no violations (by Apple) of antitrust laws were recognized — the subject of Epic’s challenge —, but the company was forced to allow applications to direct users to payment platforms outside of its app store system. , thus avoiding the commission charged by Maçã. This ban, for the California judge who made the decision, would constitute a violation of state law.
This redirection is already allowed in “reader” apps, which are used to consume content, generally through a subscription, as in the case of Netflix. They offer buttons and links that redirect users to subscribe to the service outside of the App Store payment system. However, games — large sources of profits from transactions and purchases — would still need to receive this permission from Apple, as mandated by the ruling.
In the appeal request to the Supreme Court, Maçã claimed, according to the Archyde.com, that the first instance sentence violated the US Constitution by going beyond the powers that the judge would have. For the Cupertino giant, the order to take a national measure as a precaution for a case sustained by just one developer — and not a group — was unjustified and, therefore, excessive.
It is worth remembering that, since Apple decided to file this appeal, the obligation relating to redirecting users to make transactions outside the App Store system has been suspended, as decided by the US Ninth Circuit Court. Compliance with this provision will continue until the Supreme Court decides whether to analyze the case.
If the highest level of US jurisdiction decides not to consider the dispute, what was ordered by the first instance, in 2021, will have to be complied with. This includes both Apple’s obligation and Epic’s payment of 30% of the revenue raised from Fortnite in 2020 after the creation of the option for purchases outside the App Store until October 2020 and all of the company’s revenue until the trial.
The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on whether to consider the case this year or next, although there is no set deadline for this. If the case is judged by the Court, the sentence will certainly be very important for defining criteria in cases like this.
via Bloomberg
1695927304
#Epic #case #Apple #appeals #Supreme #Court #decision #external #links