Vetted by NeuralPress's Multi-Agent Verifier for strict factual validity and event relevance. Our compliance engine cross-checks and filters search results to ensure zero false correlations or misleading content.
Primary Sources
Apple files for Supreme Court stay in Epic case over off-App Store ...
Apple has filed an application with the Supreme Court asking it to stay the Ninth Circuit’s mandate, which would send the case back to the District Court to determine what it can charge for purchases made outside the App Store. Here are the details. A bit of context Last year, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California found Apple in contempt of a 2021 injunction related to off-App Store purchases. The injunction prohibited Apple from blocking developers from including buttons or links to alternative purchasing mechanisms, and from communicating with users about those options using contact information obtained in-app. However, the injunction didn’t specify whether Apple could charge a commission on those external purchases. From the ruling: Apple Inc. and its officers, agents, servants, employees, and any person in active concert or participation with them (“Apple”), are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from prohibiting developers from (i) including in their apps and their metadata buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to In-App Purchasing and (ii) communicating with customers through points of contact obtained voluntarily from customers through account registration within the app. After the injunction took effect, Apple updated its App Store rules to allow those links while still applying a commission, setting a fee of up to 27%. That, in turn, led to the contempt ruling, with the court arguing that by charging that fee, Apple was violating the spirit of the injunction, even though the order itself did not mention or explicitly prohibit such commissions. Following the contempt decision, the case went to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the District Court’s zero-commission rule and sent the case back to determine what commission Apple may charge. Adding to the complexity of the case, Apple argues that the injunction improperly applies not just to Epic Games, but to all developers worldwide who distribute apps on the App Store’s U.S. storefront. Since the 2025 contempt ruling, Apple has been complying with the order, while at the same time attempting to reverse several of its aspects. That includes a new bid to take the case up to the Supreme Court, which brings us to today. Apple asks the Supreme Court to pause next phase of Epic case In a filing sent to the Supreme Court today, Apple is asking the court to stay the Ninth Cir...
Apple Asks Supreme Court to Enter Epic App Store Fee Fight
Apple is asking the US Supreme Court to intervene after a federal appeals court refused to let the company keep its current App Store commission rules in place during its fight with Epic Games. The latest ruling sends Apple back to a lower court to determine what, if anything, it may charge developers for transactions that start through outside payment links. The decision came from the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which reversed an earlier order that had temporarily protected Apple's existing commission model while the company pursued a Supreme Court appeal. A three-judge panel granted Epic Games' request for reconsideration and said Apple had not shown that the Supreme Court was likely to take the case.The dispute centers on Apple's rules for developers who direct users away from the App Store to third-party payment options. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers previously ordered Apple to relax its anti-steering rules, but Epic later argued that Apple's revised approach still made outside links unattractive because commissions remained too high.Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney announced the development on X, saying Apple's litigation delay tactics had reached the end of the road. The case now returns to Judge Gonzalez Rogers in California, where the court will decide whether Apple can collect commissions on external-link transactions and, if so, how much.Apple can still file its petition with the Supreme Court while the lower-court process moves forward. The company argues that it should be compensated for the technology behind its platform and has challenged the lower-court order, while Epic is pushing for fewer payment restrictions for developers and users.
Apple asks Supreme Court to pause contempt finding in Epic Games case
Apple is going to the Supreme Court for a stay, while the district court litigates the amount of commission fees Apple is permitted to impose. The Hill reached out to Apple and Epic Games for comment.
Apple loses a court battle to delay App Store changes
Apple has lost a court battle to delay App Store changes while it asks the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on its never-ending legal brouhaha with Epic Games. On April 29 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an earlier decision that had let the tech giant keep its current App Store commission structure […]
