Latest News U.S. Federal Judge and Epic Games Challenge Whether Apple has complied with the an Order to allow Payment Steering -
A hearing on the evidence of the Epic Games v. Apple case is following up on the question of whether Apple is in fact complying with the U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers' order to allow developers of apps in order to "steer" users to third-party payment options outside of the app's native App Store.
Hearings on the evidence of Apple's subsequent compliance began on Wednesday, May 8. AP says that judge Gonzalez Rogers " questioned whether Apple had set an array of unnecessary obstacles in order to prevent using alternative payment methods in iPhone apps," regardless of the court's directive.
Hearing Focused on Whether Apple Policy is Still Anti-Steering
The AP article further explains that the judge Gonzalez Rogers' tone suggested Apple's actions have been focused on protecting Apple's own profits rather than ensuring that it is in line with the intended outcome of her decision to allow steering and increase iPhone users' capability to switch easily to different in-app payment options. The article points out that in the Epic document, Apple is still blocking users from steering them towards other payment methods with lower pricing choices.
The AP article continues that in the course of the hearing, the Apple chief executive of the iPhone App Store, Matthew Fischer, disclosed that Apple had only accepted approval for applications to use 38 apps to display links to other payment systems, "a fraction of the approximately 2 million iPhone apps that are 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 -most likely because of cost as the 27% Apple fee and the additional cost of credit card fees could result in more expensive overall price for app developers.
Apple Executive 'Unaware' of Higher Overall Cost Issue
The LAW360 piece on May 10, 2015, recounts that day's proceedings in which Epic lawyer Yonatan Even and Judge Gonzalez Rogers questioned Apple Finance Vice President Alex Roman. Even emphasized the 3% lower fee that is offered by Apple -- 27% for transactions taking place in an application that is not on Apple devices as compared to its usual in-app $30 fee as well as Epic further provided proof that the cost for payments in the U.S. is 3.5% and a yoga application CEO who testified that he pays 3.5% to 6.5 percent fees for payment processing. Then, after Roman said he was not conscious of this, Even reiterated that the intention was to create an amount that allowed the developers to provide users with a lower price. They asked Roman to clarify what he thought he knew about this. The judge Gonzalez Rogers is quoted as telling Roman that "'It sounds like you all had a tendency to make decisions with no data or information,' she stated. "It seems to me like the intention was to preserve ... the revenue that you have had before.'" Access the LAW360 article here.
We are pleased to see The Judge's View with Epic
Chief Executive Officer David Nachman states that "We're pleased to see the judge siding in favor of Epic in this case We're optimistic that the court will force Apple to allow steering for app and game developers with no fees or restrictions. The company's goal is to open up the global marketplace for software and digital product firms, and we're joining our customers to celebrate this progress toward free commerce on mobile."
Additional Antitrust Action against Apple launched by US Justice Department
Alongside the Epic Games case, the U.S. Justice Department launched an antitrust lawsuit against Apple in the month of March 2024 and claimed Apple holds monopoly control over the mobile market, and this includes (among many others) in the area of electronic payment.