Apple has refuted claims that it is not complying with a US court order to enable third-party web payment links in apps, which was the result of a complaint from Epic Games.
Epic had requested the judge to hold Apple in contempt of court last month. However, in a filing asking for the case to be dismissed, Apple stated that it had already updated its guidelines to allow developers to communicate with consumers about alternative purchase options both within and outside their apps.
Apple’s statement mentioned, “In short, Apple’s efforts to comply with the injunction were done in good faith.”
The legal dispute continues
The Apple vs. Epic case, which began in 2021, involved Epic Games challenging Apple’s platform policies. They alleged that Apple was operating a monopoly and engaging in anti-competitive behavior by restricting companies from conducting business directly with their customers.
Epic lost on most counts, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that Apple must allow US publishers to link to external payment methods on the web.
Although the Supreme Court declined to hear a new challenge, Apple agreed to allow payment links within apps with a 27% fee on those transactions.
The injunction against Apple explicitly stated that developers can include in-app links, buttons, or calls to action directing users to alternate purchase methods. It also allows publishers to communicate with users outside the app about these options using contact information obtained through app account registration.
Last month, Epic requested the judge to hold Apple in contempt, alleging that Apple had not followed the court order.
According to Bloomberg, Epic claimed that Apple’s new scheme “overly burdens in-app links directing users to alternative purchase methods on a developer’s website.”
Apple argued in its filing that the injunction recognized Apple’s ability to charge a commission and take measures to protect users.
“The aim of the injunction is to make information about alternate purchase options more accessible, not to dictate Apple’s commercial terms for providing access to its platform, tools, and userbase,” Apple stated in its filing.
Apple contended that Epic was not trying to enforce the injunction but rather seeking to have the court interfere in Apple’s business operations to enhance its own profitability.
