Tim Sweeney: the Ninth Circuit's decision on the Epic v. Apple contempt ruling appeal “completely shuts down” App Store rules letting Apple collect “junk fees”
In an interview, Epic Games' CEO says that an appeals court ruling in its case against Apple is ‘really awesome for all developers.’
The VergeJay Peters
Context & Ripple Effects
This is the latest turn in Epic’s long-running challenge to Apple’s App Store controls. Earlier appellate litigation largely rejected Epic’s broader challenge to the store’s structure, while preserving a path for developers to direct users toward other payment options through an appeals-court ruling left in place by the Supreme Court.
The new Ninth Circuit decision concerns the contempt-ruling appeal rather than the original merits case. Sweeney’s response frames it as a meaningful constraint on how Apple can apply fees around alternative payment routes—an issue Epic had pursued since its 2021 appeal of the initial ruling.
First-order effects
Apple faces an immediate legal constraint on App Store rules that, according to Epic, enabled fees on transactions linked to developer-directed payment options.
Developers gain a stronger basis to steer users to payment methods outside Apple’s in-app purchase flow, with the potential to retain more control over transaction economics.
Second-order effects
Apple will need to assess and potentially revise the rules, disclosures, and fee structures governing external purchase links; developers will in turn weigh whether the operational and conversion trade-offs justify using them.
The ruling strengthens the commercial relevance of payment providers and developer-run checkout flows, because alternative payments are more useful when platform-imposed charges are more limited.
Third-order effects
The case points toward platform fee disputes shifting from the headline commission rate to the enforceability of surrounding rules that can preserve that rate, including anti-steering restrictions and external-payment charges.
If courts continue to police those rules, mobile distribution could move toward more contestable payment choices without necessarily requiring a wholesale opening of app-store distribution.
The trend: App-store regulation and litigation are increasingly focused on whether platform gatekeepers can preserve payment take rates through the rules surrounding nominally permitted alternatives.
Justifiable costs? Likely $10's to $100's per app review, not a percentage of developer revenue. This is the beginning of true, untaxed competition in payments worldwide on iOS.
Epic Games has now (probably) forced Apple and Google to make dramatic changes to a highly profitable business that consumers can or will feel. — Did even government Big Tech antitrust actions have this big an impact? — www.theverge.com/news/843265/ ...
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals just released its ruling regarding the App Store anti-steering injunction ruling. I'm currently reading through the ruling. The ruling offers something for both sides. Link-outs remain, but Apple will be able to charge for link-out [image]
The 9th Circuit Court has confirmed: The Apple Tax is dead in the USA. Apple can require side-by-side placement of Apple payments and developer payments, as Fortnite does. And Apple can collect fees for actual costs of facilitating links and IP associated with links.
A federal appeals court has reopened the door for Apple to collect commissions on outside payments again, but the company won't see any money until Epic signs off on it. By @Amber_M_Neely https://appleinsider.com/...
The 9th Circuit has just published its decision on Apple's appeal against the sanctions the court imposed for violating the injunction Epic Games had won. Epic got a reasonably good (even if not perfect) outcome: by and large, the district judge was right, but Apple can charge s…