On Tuesday, Apple returned to the courtroom to challenge Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers’ injunctions in the ongoing Epic Games litigation, with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit showing interest in Apple’s stance. The company is aiming to overturn either the second injunction issued earlier this year or the initial injunction from 2021, and has sought a reassignment to a different judge.
During the proceedings, Apple’s attorney Gregory Garre concentrated on the zero commission rule, which bars Apple from collecting fees for transactions occurring outside its ecosystem. The court examined how Apple would assess compensation for payments made outside the App Store and questioned the company’s dedication to addressing the matter.
Judge Milan Smith Jr. voiced doubts regarding Apple’s assertion that the ruling should solely impact Epic Games, implying that the decision could have wider ramifications for all App Store developers. Garre insisted that any modifications should be confined to Epic, compelling other developers to file their own lawsuits for comparable changes.
Epic’s attorney, Gary Bornstein, contended that Apple had never suggested a reduced commission during the legal proceedings, and permitting Apple to revisit the case would be unjust. Nevertheless, the court seemed to favor Apple’s viewpoint, indicating that prohibiting Apple from charging for specific purchases might lead to substantial financial repercussions.
The court has since adjourned and will determine whether to approve or reject Apple’s requests concerning the injunctions and the potential reassignment of the case.
