Apple Denies Violating U.S. Court Order in Epic Games Lawsuit | May 2024
May 2024 | Volume 15, Issue 10
Read the full article from Reuters.
According to the article, iPhone maker Apple recently denied violating a court order governing its App Store and urged a California federal judge to reject a request by “Fortnite” developer Epic Games to hold it in contempt of court.
Apple made the arguments in a filing to U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, who presided over Epic’s lawsuit in 2020 accusing Apple of violating antitrust law with its tight controls over how consumers download apps and pay for transactions within them.
Apple’s Stance
The Apple filing criticized what it called an attempt by Epic to make Apple's "tools and technologies available to developers for free."
Epic, it said, wanted the court "to micromanage Apple’s business operations in a way that would increase Epic’s profitability."
Epic largely lost its case against Apple, but Rogers in 2021 ordered Apple to give developers greater freedom to guide app users to alternative payment methods for digital goods.
The U.S. Supreme Court in January declined to hear Apple's appeal of the injunction order.
Epic Games’ Stance
Epic said in a court filing last month that Cupertino, California-based Apple was in “blatant violation” of the court’s injunction. It pointed to Apple’s imposition of a 27 percent fee on developers for some purchases, which the video game maker said makes links for alternative payment options "commercially unusable."
Epic also alleged Apple barred some apps from informing users about other ways to pay for goods.
Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Elon Musk’s X and Match Group last month echoed Epic’s arguments, telling Rogers that Apple was in “clear violation” of the court’s order.
Epic Games’ Case Against Google
In a similar case that Epic brought against Alphabet's Google, a judge in San Francisco is expected this year to issue a separate injunction affecting the Google Play Store.
The case is Epic Games Inc v Apple Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 20-05640.
Discussion Questions
- Define contempt of court.
Contempt of court, often referred to simply as "contempt", is the crime of being disobedient and/or disrespectful to a court of law and its officers through behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice, and dignity of the court.
There are two categories of contempt: (1) Being disrespectful to legal authorities in the courtroom; and (2) Willfully failing to obey a court order. Contempt proceedings are especially used to enforce equitable remedies, such as injunctions. In some jurisdictions, the refusal to respond to subpoena, to testify, to fulfill the obligations of a juror, or to provide certain information can constitute contempt of the court.
When a court decides that an action constitutes contempt of court, it can issue an order during a court trial or hearing that declares a person or organization to have disobeyed or been disrespectful of the court's authority. This is called being “found” or “held” in contempt, and is the judge's strongest power to impose sanctions for acts that disrupt the court's normal process.
A finding of being in contempt of court may result from a failure to obey a lawful order of a court, showing disrespect for the judge, disruption of the proceedings through poor behavior, or publication of material or non-disclosure of material, which in doing so is deemed likely to jeopardize a fair trial.
A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine, jail, or community service for someone found guilty of contempt of court. - Explain the nature of Epic Games’ litigation against Apple.
As indicated in the article, Epic Games’ lawsuit against Apple, which originated in 2020, accused Apple of violating antitrust law with its tight controls over how consumers download apps and pay for transactions within them. Although Epic Games largely lost its antitrust case against Apple, in 2021, presiding U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ordered Apple to give developers greater freedom to guide app users to alternative payment methods for digital goods. The current dispute addresses the question of whether Apple violates Judge Rogers’ order by imposing a 27 percent fee on developers for some purchases while simultaneously making alternative payment options for users “commercially unusable.” - Do you support Epic Games’ arguments in this case, or do you support Apple’s? Explain your response.
This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary. If the information provided in the article is factual (more particularly, if Apple is indeed interfering with the ability of users to use payment options other than Apple’s), your author supports Epic Games’ contention that Apple is in violation of Judge Rogers’ order. It certainly helps Epic Games that major “players” in the tech industry, including Meta Platforms, Microsoft, X (formerly Twitter), and Match Group all believe that Apple is in “clear violation” of the order.