In a victory for Apple, The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday denied Fortnite-maker Epic Games’ request to lift a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that delayed implementing a lower court injunction against Apple. The injunction would have forced Apple to change payment practices in its App Store.
The 9th Circuit had upheld the injunction in April, but put it on hold in July to give Apple time to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s decision on Wednesday means that the injunction will remain on hold for now, and Apple will not be forced to change its payment practices.
MacDailyNews Take: Well, at least Epic is really good at one thing: losing.
As we wrote in July:
Epic is nuts. They want all of the benefits of Apple’s App Store for free. That isn’t how any of this works. Hopefully, SCOTUS will [eventually] correct the 9th Circuit judge’s foolishness which is akin to a judge issuing an injunction that forces Best Buy and Target to place signs next to each product that advertise lower prices for the same items at Walmart.
Regardless, even if the Supreme Court [ultimately] rules against Apple, if developers like Epic Games want to advertise lower prices using Apple’s App Store, Apple should simply begin charging an In-Store Advertising fee, because that’s exactly what it would be.
Please help support MacDailyNews. Click or tap here to support our independent tech blog. Thank you!
Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.
I don’t know what you wrote “nuts” about in July, but isn’t this particular case the one count Apple lost on – that they can’t prevent apps from pointing to alternative payment mechanisms? In other words, this is not to require Apple to change the AppStore to let Epic free-load – Epic already lost those battles in the lower courts.
MDN wasn’t actually on the ball at the time they first wrote their comment. The analogy is incorrect as the ‘ad’ would have been in the ‘box’ with the product similar to how offers and the warranty card are packed in physical products. No signs exist to redirect the user before actually owning the app ‘product’.
Wouldn’t it be more profitable for Sweeny spend his time writing games?