Apple asks – Apple is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to step in again in its long-running fight with Epic Games, arguing a lower-court injunction tied to Epic should not spread to all developers on the U.S. App Store. The move comes as Apple also contests a civil contempt o
A familiar fight is back in motion at the highest level, and Apple wants to keep it narrow.
In a new petition. Apple argues that its dispute with Epic Games over App Store commissions shouldn’t lead to an injunction that reaches every developer publishing on the U.S. App Store. The petition emphasizes that Epic never brought a class action and never tried to show that stopping Apple’s conduct across the board—including against companies like Microsoft and Spotify. which were not part of this litigation—was necessary to provide relief to Epic.
Apple is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the lower court ruling. The filing comes as the case continues to churn through the courts, with Apple and Epic locked in litigation that began with Epic’s original 2020 lawsuit and has now stretched for over five years.
The new petition also pushes back on a Ninth Circuit civil contempt order tied to Apple’s compliance with the injunction. That court had ruled that Apple must allow developers to include links in their apps. The links can direct users to alternative payment options outside of Apple’s own system.
Apple says it permitted linking as required, but charged fees on purchases made through those external options. The Ninth Circuit concluded that charging 27% on external payments defeated the purpose of allowing the links—an outcome it described as undermining what the court intended.
Apple’s counter is more technical and more pointed. Its new argument centers on whether a federal court can hold a party in civil contempt for violating the “spirit” of an injunction when the injunction itself left room for interpretation and did not specifically address commissions. Apple’s position is that the order didn’t specifically prohibit charging fees on external purchases. even if it restricted Apple from doing something broader.
Epic Games, for its part, criticized the latest move as “one last Hail Mary to delay a conclusion to this case and avoid opening up the gates to payment competition for the benefit of consumers.”
Apple’s posture also follows a setback earlier this month, when the Supreme Court rejected Apple’s request to pause additional proceedings while the court determined whether the sanctions were justified.
Outside the courtroom, Epic is acting on the belief that it has momentum. This week, Epic said Fortnite was back in the App Store globally, with the exception of Australia. Epic’s announcement reflects its view that the court is on its side and that Apple’s fee structure will not be allowed to stand as it currently does.
The dispute now hinges on how far an injunction should reach and what exactly a court can enforce when it believes a party complied “on paper” but violated the intent behind the ruling.
Apple Epic Games Supreme Court App Store Fortnite injunction civil contempt commissions external payments Microsoft Spotify Ninth Circuit
So Apple wants the Supreme Court to tell everyone to stay in their lane? Cool.
I don’t get it, if Epic is winning some stuff then Apple just keeps asking for it to be smaller. Sounds like rich companies gaming the system until it’s basically nothing.
Wait, they’re saying the injunction shouldn’t spread to all developers?? But if links are allowed, why are they still mad about the 27% fee on external payments? Like… is the point to stop Apple fees or just make them look nicer?
This is like when someone says they’re not doing a class action but everyone still gets the benefits anyway. I’m just guessing, but sounds like Apple is trying to avoid paying back Microsoft/Spotify or whatever, even though those weren’t in the case. Also if Epic started it in 2020 and it’s been 5 years, can the Supreme Court just end it already? My head hurts reading ‘civil contempt’ lol.