**Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc.: A New Phase in the Legal Dispute**
Following a short hiatus, the legal skirmish between Epic Games, Inc. and Apple Inc. has reignited with fresh intensity in the Ninth Circuit. Apple is challenging not only the initial verdict but is also seeking to have the case reassigned to a different judge should it return to the district court.
### Case Background
The story commenced in 2021 when Epic Games obtained an injunction that prevented Apple from blocking developers from directing users to alternative payment options. In April 2023, a subsequent ruling declared Apple in civil contempt for purportedly violating the original injunction. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers responded with a detailed new injunction, which included barring Apple from collecting any commission on transactions executed outside its in-app payment framework and limiting how developers could reference third-party payment solutions.
### Latest Developments
In a newly filed appeal, Apple contends against the district court’s mandate that prohibits it from collecting any commission on in-app purchases made outside its ecosystem. Apple asserts that the revised order rewrites existing rules and penalizes the company for actions that do not violate California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The corporation argues that civil contempt powers should enforce current orders rather than impose new, more severe penalties.
Apple’s appeal underscores several critical points:
– The new restriction on any commission for sales enabled by Apple’s platform lacks foundation in the initial injunction and is inherently unjust.
– The implementation of a zero royalty for a major class of transactions is punitive and infringes upon the U.S. Constitution.
– The district court’s remedy for the claimed non-compliance with the original injunction is an unfair new injunction that contradicts the UCL.
Apple also defends its 27% commission for purchases made through external links, positing that while the commission may be viewed as steep, the correct course of action should not be the eradication of all commissions.
### Apple’s Appeal Requests
In short, Apple’s appeal requests encompass:
1. Nullifying the new injunction that forbids all commissions on external purchases.
2. Overturning additional limitations on steering, including button design and disclosure formats.
3. Reversing the civil contempt ruling.
4. Cancelling all injunctive relief based on recent California precedent.
5. Reassigning the case to a different judge if it is sent back to the district court.
The request for reassignment is particularly significant, as Apple posits that the original judge may find it challenging to set aside former opinions or rulings, potentially undermining the perception of fairness.
### Conclusion
Apple’s legal representatives have voiced concerns regarding the repercussions of the injunction on the App Store’s functionality, stressing the need to uphold user confidence in security and privacy. As the case unfolds, the resolution will greatly impact both Apple and the wider app landscape. Epic Games has opted not to address the latest updates, leaving the future course of this high-profile legal confrontation unclear.
