Apple and Epic Games are locked in a long-running legal battle that has drawn intense attention in the tech and business worlds. The dispute centers on Apple's App Store rules , which govern the fees charged on purchases made through external links. It's an issue that has sparked controversy and led to significant legal developments.
See also: What does Apple say about the case with Epic Games in Australia?
The recent agreement between Apple and Epic Games to ask the court to temporarily postpone key deadlines is a new development in this dispute. Apple is seeking to stay the proceedings until the United States Supreme Court rules on its appeal. This appeal concerns two main issues: first, whether Apple can be held liable for imposing fees on purchases through external links, and second, whether the ban can be applied broadly to all developers, not just Epic.
The Supreme Court agreed to consider the issue of contempt but declined to consider the broader scope of the ban. This means that the question of the broad application of the ban remains open and will have to be considered in future legal proceedings.
Meanwhile, the district court was preparing to review the rules governing the commission Apple could charge on purchases made through external links. Apple had previously asked the Supreme Court to stay the appeals court’s order pending review, but Justice Elena Kagan denied that request. That left both the Supreme Court case and the lower court proceedings to proceed simultaneously.
See also: Epic says Apple's Supreme Court appeals should be dismissed
According to the district court’s timeline, Apple had to file a motion by July 6 explaining how it planned to implement the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, including any proposed fee structure. Apple would then have until July 16 to produce relevant non-privileged documents. Epic’s response would be scheduled within 60 days of the latter of those two steps, followed by 30 days for Apple to respond.
Apple and Epic Games ’ decision to jointly request a stay of the existing review deadlines indicates their desire to await the Supreme Court’s decision before proceeding with further legal proceedings. Apple informed the court that it planned to request a stay of proceedings until the Supreme Court rules, suggesting a short delay while that request is considered and decided.
Under the proposed timeline, Apple will file its suspension request by July 6, Epic will respond by July 10, and Apple will file its response by July 13.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers must sign the proposed order to go into effect, meaning existing review deadlines technically remain in effect unless and until she approves the new timeline. The ruling could have significant implications for the future of App Store rules and how tech companies manage their platforms.
See also: Epic Games: Forces App Store policy to change
The dispute between Apple and Epic Games has broader implications for the tech industry and how platforms manage their relationships with developers. The outcome of this case could determine the future of the rules governing in-app purchases and influence the strategies of tech companies around the world.
