Latest News U.S. Federal Judge and Epic Games Contest Whether Apple is Compliant with The Order to Allow Payment Steering -
An evidentiary hearing of the Epic Games v. Apple trial is examining whether Apple really has complied with U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers' order that allowed app developers to "steer" users towards third-party payment methods outside of the app's native App Store.
Hearings on the evidence of Apple's subsequent compliance began on the 8th of May. AP says the judge Gonzalez Rogers " questioned whether Apple has set an array of unnecessary barriers to discourage using alternative payments for iPhone apps" regardless of the court's directive.
Hearings focused on whether Apple Policy Doesn't Change.
The AP report further states that Judge Gonzalez Rogers' tone suggested the Apple's approach has been primarily focussed on preserving Apple's profits rather than ensuring that it is in line with the intended outcome of her order to allow steering and increase iPhone users' capability to switch easily to different payments in the app. The piece explains that according to Epic documents, Apple is still blocking the developers from directing consumers to other payment options with less expensive alternatives.
The AP article continues by stating that as part of the hearing, Apple chief executive of the iPhone App Store, Matthew Fischer revealed that Apple has received and accepted applications for 38 applications that display hyperlinks to payment platforms, "a fraction of the around two million iPhone applications available within the U.S."
PC Mag points out that the low number of applications (38 out of the 65,000 app developers that offer in-app purchases -it is most likely due to costs because the 27 percent Apple fee and the additional cost of fees charged by credit cards could result in greater overall expense for developers.
Apple Executive 'Unaware' of the Higher Costs Issue
A LAW360 piece that ran on Friday, May 10 details the day's events in which Epic lawyer Yonatan Even, along with the judge Gonzalez Rogers questioned Apple Finance Vice President Alex Roman. Even pointed out the lower cost of 3% from Apple -- which is 27% for transactions taking place outside an app for Apple devices, in contrast the usual 30percent fee and then Epic has also presented evidence to show that the typical cost of payment services within the U.S. is 3.5%, with a yoga app CEO who testified that he pays 3.5 percentage to 6.5% fees for payment processing. Then, after Roman declared that he was not aware of that, Even reiterated that the intention was to create the fee to allow companies to give users a better price by asking Roman if he understood the significance of that. Judge Gonzalez Rogers is quoted as telling Roman that "'It appears that you made lots of decisions with little or no information or information,' she stated. 'It sounds to me as if you were trying to keep ... the income that you had previously.'" Access the LAW360 report here.
Pleased to See The Judge's View with Epic
Chief Executive Officer David Nachman states that "We're pleased to see the judge agree in favor of Epic with respect to this dispute We're hoping that the court will order Apple to allow steering to game and app developers without fees and unnecessary limitations. The company's goal is to open up worldwide commerce for software as well as digital product firms, and we're joining our customers to celebrate this step towards free commerce on mobile."
Additional Antitrust Action against Apple It was initiated by the US Justice Department
In addition to in addition to the Epic Games case, the U.S. Justice Department launched an antitrust case against Apple in March 2024 in which it claimed that Apple has monopoly power in the smartphone market, including (among others) in the area of digital payments.