Epic Games Appeals to Supreme Court in Legal Battle
- tech360.tv
- Jul 28, 2023
- 2 min read
Updated: Jan 4, 2024
[Edited] In a bid to overturn lower court rulings that found Apple not in violation of antitrust laws, Epic Games has requested the US Supreme Court to review the case.
The gaming company, known for its popular game "Fortnite," has been engaged in a legal battle against Apple, alleging that the App Store's commission structure, which charges developers up to 30% on in-app purchases, violates antitrust laws.
Earlier this year, a trial court ruled in favor of Apple, stating that the App Store does not break antitrust laws. However, the court did find that a provision preventing developers from offering users links to third-party payment methods violated a California unfair competition law. Apple was ordered to change this practice, but the implementation of these orders has been put on hold pending the appeal process.
The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court's ruling, and Epic's emergency bid to enforce the lower court's decision regarding changes to App Store rules was rejected by the US Supreme Court. Now, Epic Games is seeking clarification on various complex aspects of antitrust law from the highest court in the country.
The trial court acknowledged that Apple's practices do indeed limit competition in the software market. However, it also sided with Apple's argument that these anticompetitive effects are offset by the company's efforts to maintain the security of iPhones. Epic Games contends that the trial court incorrectly conducted the legal balancing test in reaching this conclusion.
Apple has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding Epic Games' appeal to the US Supreme Court.
Epic Games has asked the US Supreme Court to review the antitrust case it brought against Apple.
The case revolves around Epic's allegations that Apple's App Store commission structure violates antitrust laws.
A trial court ruled in favor of Apple, but found that a provision restricting third-party payment methods violated a California unfair competition law.
Source: REUTERS