#Apple vs epic ruling registration
#Apple vs epic ruling trial

On a side note, it was also ruled that Fortnite’s Peely character is allowed to appear naked in court. However, Apple refused to let Epic back in the South Korean App Store. Epic did ask Apple to allow Fortnite back on the App Store in South Korea after a law was passed preventing Apple and Google from forcing app developers to use their in-app billing systems. He adds that Fortnite will only return to the iOS App Store “when and where Epic can offer in-app payment in fair competition with Apple in-app payment, passing along the savings to consumers” and that they will keep fighting over fair competition. Epic is fighting for fair competition among in-app payment methods and app stores for a billion consumers. Today’s ruling isn't a win for developers or for consumers. On the other side, Tim Sweeney, Epic’s CEO, considers the ruling as a loss for both developers and consumers alike. Even though it was shown that game developers account for 70% of the App Store revenue, Apple was not deemed a monopoly.

#Apple vs epic ruling registration

However, despite the overwhelming victory for Apple, the judge passed a permanent injunction stating that Apple is no longer allowed to prohibit “developers from (i) including in their apps and their metadata buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to In-App Purchasing and (ii) communicating with customers through points of contact, obtained voluntarily from customers through account registration within the app”.Īpple described the outcome as a “ resounding victory”. Epic has to pay damages for breach of contract, totaling 30% of all revenues collected through direct payments from Fortnite’s iOS version (roughly 6 million USD). The verdict dropped on September 10th, Apple won on most counts.

Tying the App Store in the iOS App Distribution Market to In-App Purchase in the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market (California Cartwright Act).

Unreasonable Restraints of Trade in the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market (California Cartwright Act).

Unreasonable Restraints of Trade in the iOS App Distribution Market (California Cartwright Act).

Tying the App Store in the iOS App Distribution Market to In-App Purchase in the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market (Sherman Act § 1).

Unreasonable Restraints of Trade in the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market (Sherman Act § 1).

Unlawful Monopoly Maintenance in the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market (Sherman Act § 2).

Unreasonable Restraints of Trade in the iOS App Distribution Market (Sherman Act § 1).

Denial of Essential Facility in the iOS App Distribution Market (Sherman Act § 2).

Unlawful Monopoly Maintenance in the iOS App Distribution Market (Sherman Act § 2).Photo by Joshua Hoehne on UnsplashĮpic sued Apple with over 10 different charges: When Apple retaliated by removing Fortnite from the App Store because it breached the rules, Epic filed a lawsuit. Why Epic sued AppleĪpple prohibits developers from directing users to external payment systems for in-app purchases… Even though some recent policies have started to question that rule, app developers weren’t allowed to even mention another payment system inside their app.Įpic took it upon itself to bypass this rule and implemented their own payment processing system in the iOS version of Fortnite, their extremely popular battle royale game. No matter the outcome, Epic’s accusation drew a lot of attention to Apple’s anti-steering policies concerning in-app payments and their often criticized 30% commission.

#Apple vs epic ruling trial

9 months later, in May 2021, the trial took place in Oakland, California, under the scrutiny of all tech professionals.īecause Epic was accusing Apple of having unfair and anti-competitive actions to maintain its monopoly, this trial was set to change some ground rules in the app market. In August 2020, Epic filed a lawsuit against Apple after they removed Fortnite (Epic’s game) from the App Store.