A judge of the federal district court found that Apple violated the court order in the epic Games vs. Apple Antitrest case.
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeny tweeted about the victory of the court, saying, “No fees on web transactions. Game over for Apple Tax.”
If Sweeni is correct in its interpretation of the ruling, it can be an attractive result for epic games, whose Fortnite has been banned by Apple in the US, due to large -scale litigation.
In a statement, a spokesman for Apple said, “We strongly disagree with the decision. We will follow the court order and we will appeal.”
He said that “15% to 30% of the junk fees of Apple are now dead in the United States as they are in Europe under the Digital Markets Act. There is illegal, illegal there.”
US District Court Judge Yavon Gonzalas Rogers organized Apple in contempt of his former court verdict. He wrote, “For the reasons given here, the court has found Apple in the unique violation of this court.
2021 prohibitory orders that have been issued to prevent and restrict the anticomotive conduct of Apple and
Anticomatative pricing. Apple will not have continuous efforts to interfere with the competition
Toar. ,
Sweeni said that the case has been going on for four years, four months and 17 days.
“We will return to Fortanite at the US iOS App Store next week,” Sweeni said. “The epic pursues a peace proposal: If Apple expands the friction-free, apple-free structure of the court worldwide, we will return to Fortnite in the app store around the world and give up the current and future litigation on this subject.”
We have sought a comment from Apple. Gonzalas Rogers wrote in his judgment, “Apple’s response to prohibition strains. The decision-making process, not a tailor-made for litigation, the court ordered the production of real-time documents and finally held a second set of hearing in 2025.”
In short: Judge wrote, “One, after testing, the court found that 30% of Apple’s commission” allowed it to resume supercompatible operating margin “and was not bound by the value of his intellectual property, and thus, was an antagomatural response. Apple’s response: A 27% commission (a 27% commission (a 27% commission, where Was, which was nothing.
He said, “Apple’s goal: Maintain your anticomatural revenue stream. Two, the court stopped Apple from denying the ability to communicate the developers, and to direct consumers, other
Purchase system. Apple’s response: Apply to increase new obstacles and new requirements
Excessive friction and full page “scare” screen, static URL and Broken Rate with Generic
statement. Apple’s goal: to separate customer use of optional purchase opportunities and
Maintain its anticomatural revenue stream. Finally, Apple demanded to maintain a revenue
The price of billions in the direct disregard of the prohibition of this court. ,
The judge stated that “Unlike Apple’s early in-court testimony,” documents revealed that Apple knew what it really was doing and the most anticomotive option at every turn.
The judge wrote, “To hide the truth, the Vice President of Finance, Alex Roman, lied under a lump sum oath.” “Internal, Philip Shilar advocated that Apple complies with prohibitory orders, but Tim Cook ignored Shilar and instead allowed the Chief Financial Officer to convince the Luka Maste and his finance team to explain it. Cook badly chose. Cook is badly chosen. Cook to meet the real evidence, detailed and confident standard here.
In 2021, the judge found most of Apple’s no-confidence issues, but said that Apple went far away when he told the developers that they could not advertise a low off-app-store prices for consumers inside their own apps that were subject to 30% of Apple. In 2021, after the judge pronounced the verdict that Apple had violated the antitrust law by mizlapers, directing consumers for low prices, both Apple and EPIC appealed for the verdict and the matter went to the US Supreme Court. The court said that the judge’s decision was correct, giving a huge defeat to the epic.
But today the judge wrote, “This is an prohibition, not a conversation. Once there is no over-over, when a party disregards the order of a court. The time is of the essence. The court will not tolerate further delays. As the order was given earlier, it will not apply a new commission on its new anti-anti-anticoratory functions to influence Apple.”
This can motivate a lot of game developers to follow the epic games and make their web shops or options for Apple’s store, opening Fludgates as those developers can no longer be punished to demand Apple to sideline their 30% fees.
