TLDRs; Appeals court rules against Apple, questioning legality of its 27% off-store App Store commission. Epic Games gains key victory as Apple faces scrutiny overTLDRs; Appeals court rules against Apple, questioning legality of its 27% off-store App Store commission. Epic Games gains key victory as Apple faces scrutiny over

Apple Loses Appeal in Epic App Store Battle, Court Challenges 27% Off-Store Commission

2025/12/12 19:19

TLDRs;

  • Appeals court rules against Apple, questioning legality of its 27% off-store App Store commission.
  • Epic Games gains key victory as Apple faces scrutiny over external payment restrictions.
  • Apple may have to revise App Store fees, impacting developers and revenue streams.
  • Court instructs trial judge to reconsider Apple’s commission structure following previous injunction violations.

Apple has suffered a significant legal setback as a U.S. federal appeals court ruled against the tech giant in its long-running dispute with Epic Games over App Store policies. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that Apple violated a prior court injunction by enforcing a 27% commission on transactions conducted outside the App Store.

The ruling upholds a lower court’s contempt finding against Apple and directs the trial judge to reassess the commission rates Apple can legally charge developers using its intellectual property. The decision marks a pivotal moment in a dispute that has persisted for over five years, reflecting ongoing tensions over app marketplace control and developer freedom.

Epic Games Challenges Apple’s Monopoly

Epic Games has long argued that Apple’s App Store practices restrict competition by limiting how developers can direct users to alternative payment methods. Apple’s commission structure, typically ranging from 15% to 30% for most in-app purchases, has been criticized for stifling innovation and maintaining a monopolistic hold over iOS app transactions.

The court’s decision strengthens Epic’s position and raises questions about the potential for reduced App Store fees or increased flexibility for developers. Legal experts suggest that the ruling may encourage more companies to push for alternative payment solutions, potentially reshaping how digital purchases are processed on Apple devices.

Regulatory Pressure and Global Precedents

While the appeals court’s decision casts doubt on Apple’s off-store commission, past regulatory actions indicate that any immediate changes may be moderate. In South Korea, Apple imposes a 26% commission on third-party payments, while Dutch dating apps face a 27% rate, both under regulatory oversight.

Meanwhile, Google’s “user choice billing” program allows Android developers to reduce fees by around 4 percentage points, though conversion friction often offsets these savings. In the European Union, Apple’s Digital Markets Act-compliant rates range from 10% to 17%, plus a €0.50 Core Technology Fee per first annual install exceeding one million downloads.

Experts argue that even with legal adjustments, Apple is likely to maintain revenue-protecting mechanisms such as distinct app binaries, audits, and complex fee structures.

Potential Impact on Payments and Subscriptions

A reduction in Apple’s commission could shift significant spending from in-app purchases to external payment methods, benefiting payment processors and subscription platforms. Consumer spending on non-game apps across iOS and Google Play reached $19.2 billion in Q4 2024, with productivity apps up 46% and finance apps nearing 7.5 billion downloads.

TikTok alone generated approximately $1.9 billion in in-app revenue during the same period. If off-store fees decrease meaningfully, developers may redirect users to web-based checkouts, boosting revenue opportunities for platforms that facilitate app-to-web transactions. The streaming and social media sectors, which collectively amassed over $23 billion in spending in 2024, could also see growing use of alternative payment solutions.

The ruling underscores the continuing tension between major tech platforms and regulators, as courts, lawmakers, and developers increasingly push for a more competitive digital marketplace. While Apple may appeal or adjust its policies strategically, the decision signals that App Store practices will remain under intense scrutiny in the years ahead.

The post Apple Loses Appeal in Epic App Store Battle, Court Challenges 27% Off-Store Commission appeared first on CoinCentral.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

The post China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise China’s internet regulator has ordered the country’s biggest technology firms, including Alibaba and ByteDance, to stop purchasing Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D GPUs. According to the Financial Times, the move shuts down the last major channel for mass supplies of American chips to the Chinese market. Why Beijing Halted Nvidia Purchases Chinese companies had planned to buy tens of thousands of RTX Pro 6000D accelerators and had already begun testing them in servers. But regulators intervened, halting the purchases and signaling stricter controls than earlier measures placed on Nvidia’s H20 chip. Image: Nvidia An audit compared Huawei and Cambricon processors, along with chips developed by Alibaba and Baidu, against Nvidia’s export-approved products. Regulators concluded that Chinese chips had reached performance levels comparable to the restricted U.S. models. This assessment pushed authorities to advise firms to rely more heavily on domestic processors, further tightening Nvidia’s already limited position in China. China’s Drive Toward Tech Independence The decision highlights Beijing’s focus on import substitution — developing self-sufficient chip production to reduce reliance on U.S. supplies. “The signal is now clear: all attention is focused on building a domestic ecosystem,” said a representative of a leading Chinese tech company. Nvidia had unveiled the RTX Pro 6000D in July 2025 during CEO Jensen Huang’s visit to Beijing, in an attempt to keep a foothold in China after Washington restricted exports of its most advanced chips. But momentum is shifting. Industry sources told the Financial Times that Chinese manufacturers plan to triple AI chip production next year to meet growing demand. They believe “domestic supply will now be sufficient without Nvidia.” What It Means for the Future With Huawei, Cambricon, Alibaba, and Baidu stepping up, China is positioning itself for long-term technological independence. Nvidia, meanwhile, faces…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:37