Epic’s Document Request and Apple’s Injunction Challenge
Apple faces a looming deadline to produce what it says are more than 1 million documents related to recent App Store changes.
On Friday, Judge Thomas S. Hixson denied the company’s attempt to extend that deadline, describing the request as “bad behavior.” So Apple’s deadline is still Monday, September 30: “It’s up to Apple to figure out how to meet the deadline, but Monday is indeed the deadline.”
[…]
In August, a judge directed Apple to produce all documents related to how it decided on the new App Store rules. But on Thursday, Apple said Epic’s search terms surfaced more than twice as many documents as expected, so the company needed two more weeks to review what turned out to be “north of 1.3 million documents.”
A second judge in the Apple versus Epic Games lawsuit has implied that the Cupertino company has lied to the court. It comes after the original judge strongly implied that Apple had not told the truth about the reasons for its new App Store policy.
A second judge tasked with overseeing Apple’s disclosure of decision-making documents in the antitrust case said that a court filing made by the company was “simply not believable” …
[…]
Apple had claimed its decision wasn’t financially motivated, despite the 27% commission being identical to 30% less the 3% typically charged by payment processors (which would now be paid by Epic). The judge expressed skepticism, and ordered the iPhone maker to hand over all documents leading up to it decision to continue charging commission even on sales made outside the App Store.
[…]
In a response (spotted by The Verge), the Judge Hixson has rejected that request, and said that Apple’s claim that it had only just discovered this error was “simply not believable.”
The Epic vs Apple saga resulted in an injunction forcing Apple to remove its anti-steering rules, but Epic wasn’t happy with Apple’s implementation. After more back and forth, Apple was meant to produce 1.3 million documents related to the App Store rules, but it produced something else unexpected on Monday.
Apple has filed for the court to set aside its injunction based on two new sets of precedents that didn’t exist when the injunction was filed. The 32 page court document goes into excruciating detail, and was first shared by X user Vidushi Dyall.
Basically, Apple says the injunction is no longer viable given two specific cases that took place in recent months — Beverage vs Apple and Murthy vs Missouri. The first is a state case that establishes Apple’s anti-steering rules aren’t unfair, and the second is, well, complicated.
The weird thing about the continuing Epic Games v. Apple case is that Epic is still banned in the US App Store, so even if they win on the anti-steering charge, they can’t take advantage of any remedy.
Previously:
- Epic Challenges External Link Rules and Commission
- Apple Terminates Epic Games’ Developer Account Again
- StoreKit Purchase Link Entitlement for United States
- Supreme Court Declines to Hear Apple v. Epic Case
- Epic Anti-Steering Stay and Supreme Court Petition
- Apple Wins Antitrust Battle With Epic Games
