this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
126 points (97.7% liked)

Apple

5247 readers
1 users here now

Here you can talk about Apple's ecosystem, Apple's OSs (Operating Systems), Apple's apps, Apple's everything!!

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Epic Games v. Apple judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers just ruled that, effective immediately, Apple is no longer allowed to collect fees on purchases made outside apps and blocks the company from restricting how developers can point users to where they can make purchases outside of apps. Apple says it will appeal the order.

The ruling was issued as part of Epic Games’ ongoing legal dispute against Apple, and it’s a major victory for Epic’s arguments. Gonzalez Rogers also says that Apple “willfully” chose not to comply with her previous injunction from her original 2021 ruling. “That [Apple] thought this Court would tolerate such insubordination was a gross miscalculation,” Gonzalez Rogers says.

The judge also referred the case to the US attorney to review it for possible criminal contempt proceedings.

As part of the ruling, the judge says that Apple cannot:

  • Impose “any commission or any fee on purchases that consumers make outside an app”
  • Restrict developers’ style, formatting, or placement of links for purchases outside of an app
  • Block or limit the “use of buttons or other calls to action”
  • Interfere with consumers’ choice to leave an app with anything beyond “a neutral message apprising users that they are going to a third-party site”

Apple’s senior director of corporate communications, Olivia Dalton, sent a statement to The Verge that reads, “We strongly disagree with the decision. We will comply with the court’s order and we will appeal.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago (10 children)

Honestly who cares. IDGAF if some shitty corpo has to pay another shitty corpo a cut to sell stuff on second corpo devices or not. I don't think it would materially affect pricing, it would just serve to increase profits of sellers. Either way the user is stuck in a walled garden curated by Apple to make sure you can only get corporate proprietary overpriced bullshit. If they forced Apple to allow sideloading/alternative app stores, and also EU got its shit together and enforced user-replaceable batteries, I might consider an iPhone.

[–] quetzaldilla@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

You should care, because that's how Apple gets stronger and monopolies are created.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago (4 children)

"Created"? There's been a duopoly since the inception of smartphone. This ruling does literally nothing to change that. Even sideloading wouldn't fully fix that. The only true fix is to force manufacturers to provide an unlocked bootloader and drivers (at least binaries), but I can't see this happening.

[–] ReakDuck@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

There is only one Phone on the earth that supports lots of features for disabled people. Its the IPhone. Its a monopoly.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)