Latest News U.S. Federal Judge and Epic Games Contest Whether Apple Has Complied With The Order to Allow the use of payment steering -
A hearing on the evidence on the Epic Games v. Apple case is following up on whether Apple really has complied with the U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers' order that allowed developers of apps in order to "steer" users towards third-party payment methods beyond the App Store's native App Store.
The evidentiary hearing regarding Apple's subsequent compliance began on May 8. AP reports that judge Gonzalez Rogers " questioned whether Apple had set the barrage of exasperating barriers to discourage from using other payment options for iPhone apps" regardless of the court's directive.
Hearing Focused on Whether Apple Policy is Still Anti-Steering
The AP piece further notes that Judge Gonzalez Rogers' tone suggested the Apple's approach has been primarily concentrated on protecting Apple's earnings, instead of submitting with the purpose of her decision to allow the steering of customers and to increase iPhone users' ability to easily switch to other available payment methods in the app. The piece explains that in the Epic document, Apple is still blocking developers from steering consumers to other payment options with cheaper pricing options.
The AP report continues to say that, as part of the hearing, the Apple chief executive of the iPhone App Store, Matthew Fischer explained that Apple has only received and approved applications for 38 applications that display links to other payment systems, "a fraction of the roughly two million iPhone applications available in 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 -- is likely due to the cost because the 27 percentage Apple charge plus the expense of fees charged by credit cards would likely result in a higher overall cost to developers.
Apple Executive 'Unaware' of the Higher Costs Issue
The LAW360 story that ran on Friday, May 10 describes the proceedings when Epic lawyer Yonatan Even and Judge Gonzalez Rogers questioned Apple Finance Vice President Alex Roman. Even pointed out the lower cost of 3% that is offered by Apple -- which is 27 percent on transactions made outside an app on Apple devices as compared the usual 30percent fee as well as Epic has also presented evidence to show that the typical cost of processing payments across the U.S. is 3.5%, with a yoga app CEO who testified that he pays 3.5% to 6.5% fees for payment processing. After Roman claimed that he wasn't aware of the fact, Even reiterated that the intention was to create a fee that would allow companies to give users a lower price. They asked Roman if he understood that. Judge Gonzalez Rogers is quoted as stating to Roman that "'It sounds like you all had a tendency to make decisions with little or no information or information,' she stated. "It seems to me as if the goal was to preserve ... the income that you have had previously.'" Access the LAW360 report here.
I'm glad to see Judge Side With Epic
CEO David Nachman states that "We're happy to see that the judge siding with Epic in this case We're hoping that this court can require Apple to permit steering for game and application developers with no fees or limitations. The company's goal is to open up global commerce for software and digital product companies, and we're with our clients in celebrating this step towards an open and accessible commerce experience for mobile."
Additional Antitrust Action Against Apple Launched by US Justice Department
Alongside in addition to the Epic Games case, the U.S. Justice Department launched an antitrust case against Apple in the month of March 2024, alleging that Apple has monopoly power in the mobile market, and this includes (among many others) on the subject of electronic payments.