Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Epic, Dealing a Blow to Apple’s iOS Fees

It looks like the U.S. Supreme Court has drawn a line in the sand. While it may have been willing to bend to Trump’s unpredictable whims regarding women’s rights and the Voting Rights Act, it has taken a firm stance against Apple’s attempts to sidestep a ruling about buying Fortnite V-Bucks on iPhones. The Supreme Court has turned down Apple’s appeal concerning a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that found the company in contempt for not complying with a previous District Court ruling. This ruling mandated that Apple must make third-party stores more accessible on iOS devices.

This decision is clearly the right one, and it’s almost absurd that this case made it to the Supreme Court in the first place, as it doesn’t touch on constitutional issues. Apple lost a significant part of its legal battle with Epic in 2021, where Epic sought to bypass iOS store prices and the hefty 30 percent fees. The 9th Circuit reinforced that Apple was in contempt for not fully adhering to the earlier ruling. Apple hoped that by bringing the case to the Supreme Court, it could buy more time before facing the consequences in District Court.

Last July, California’s District Court was unequivocal in its criticism of Apple’s noncompliance with previous rulings regarding third-party stores selling in-game items on iOS. The court labeled Apple’s actions as “insubordination” and “a gross miscalculation.” Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers stated, “Apple willfully chose not to comply with this Court’s Injunction. It did so with the express intent to create new anticompetitive barriers which would, by design and in effect, maintain a valued revenue stream; a revenue stream previously found to be anticompetitive.” Instead of complying, Apple introduced a new 27 percent fee to dodge the 30 percent charge, making it nearly impossible for users to navigate. The filing also claimed that Apple’s VP of finance, Alex Roman, “outright lied under oath.” The court demanded that Apple start allowing third-party purchases immediately.

In response, Apple filed yet another appeal, which the 9th Circuit dismissed with similar disdain, noting that “Apple claimed to comply with the injunction, but it instead prohibited App Store developers from using buttons, links, and other calls to action without paying a prohibitive commission to Apple, and it restricted the design of the developers’ link to make it difficult for customers to use them.” The higher court agreed that Apple was in contempt, stating, “Apple’s civic contempt was shown by clear and convincing evidence.” That’s when Apple turned to the Supreme Court for a lifeline.

However, the Supreme Court wasn’t having it. After both Apple and Epic submitted their applications, Justice Kagan denied the appeal. With no further recourse, the case will return to the Northern California District Court, likely facing the stern judgment of Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers once again. This should be interesting.

The outcome of this situation could mean that game publishers will soon be able to direct customers to their own stores for in-game items and currencies without having to fork over nearly a third of each payment to Apple. In theory, this could lead to lower prices for players, as publishers would keep a larger share of the revenue, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Epic’s CEO, Tim Sweeney, is understandably pleased, taking to social media to celebrate the Supreme Court’s decision as “great news,” and stating, “Now we head back to the District Court to determine what Apple can charge for only the necessary costs of implementing external purchase links.”