This Thursday, Epic Games filed a petition with Suprema Corte of Estados Unidos requesting the rejection of the request made by Apple to review recent court decisions in the long dispute over App Store’s rules. The gaming company argues that the lower courts were right in condemning Apple for failure to comply with an injunction and in defining the scope of mandatory changes to the app store.
The Epic document reinforces that Apple violated the express terms of the court order by imposing a 27% commission on external purchases and additional restrictions. The response also challenges Apple’s interpretation of the scope of the injunction, arguing that it benefits competition adequately without exceeding legal limits.
Epic Games contests Apple’s arguments regarding non-compliance with the injunction
The dispute dates back to 2020, when Epic Games sued Apple for anti-competitive practices at App Store. In 2021, judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple should allow developers to direct users to alternative payment systems outside of the store. The Cupertino company implemented the external link, but applied a 27% fee to transactions carried out through this route, in addition to warning screens and visual limitations.
Tribunais inferiors considered that this conduct constituted civil contempt. Epic maintains that Apple not only disregarded the spirit of the decision, but literally violated the text of the injunction. In the document filed today, the company cites judicial precedents that indicate that defendants cannot ignore the possibility of asking the court for clarification before adopting borderline conduct.
- Apple charged 27% on external purchases via link
- Aplicou warning screens about payment risks outside App Store
- Impôs restrictions on the appearance of alternative buy buttons
- Argumentou that the injunction did not explicitly prohibit the commission
- Tribunais inferiors upheld civil contempt conviction
Essa list summarizes the main controversies implemented by Apple after the initial court order.
Alcance of the injunction divides the companies into Suprema Corte
Apple claims that extending App Store’s changes to all US developers goes beyond the scope permitted by Suprema Corte’s decision in Trump v. CASA. Segundo this interpretation, injunctions must be restricted to the parties directly involved in the litigation.
Epic counters this point by stating that the process deals with the general structure of competition at App Store. Limitar the decision’s effect only on Fortnite and other securities of the company would preclude the full relief sought. The document highlights that the appeals court has already validated the scope linked to the damages suffered by Epic as a developer and distributor.
Analistas follows the case because it could define important limits for the app store business model. Desenvolvedores small and medium-sized companies argue that current practices limit payment options and increase costs passed on to the end consumer.
Histórico of court decisions favors partial changes in App Store
The case gained new chapters in 2025 and 2026. In December 2025, Nono Circuito maintained part of the lower court’s determinations. Apple sought emergency suspensions, but Suprema Corte denied the request to pause implementation of the contempt order in May 2026.
Agora, Apple’s petition seeks full review of two central points: the contempt conviction and the scope of application of the rules. Epic’s response serves as a detailed counterpoint and anticipates the arguments that the company would use if the ministers accept the case for trial.
Fortnite, the flagship title of Epic, recently returned to App Store in several regions following process-related adjustments. The company continues to invest in alternatives like its own game store, but Apple’s App Store remains a critical platform for distribution on iOS devices.
What changes for developers and users as Suprema Corte decides
Enquanto judges do not decide whether to accept or reject Apple’s petition, the current rules remain in force in Estados Unidos. Desenvolvedores can direct users to external purchases with fewer barriers imposed by Apple, although the 27% commission remains disputed.
Especialistas on antitrust law note that an eventual acceptance of the case by Suprema Corte could bring clarity on the balance between controlling platforms and promoting competition. For now, Epic emphasizes that the courts have already thoroughly analyzed the facts and that there is no reason for further intervention by the highest Corte.
The expectation is that Suprema Corte will decide on the processing of the appeal in the first half of 2026, before the summer break. Qualquer final decision will have a direct impact on the mobile application ecosystem, especially in games and consumer digital content.
Ficha case technique Epic Games versus Apple
- Original Processo started in 2020
- 2021 District Decisão External Links
- Condenação for civil contempt maintained in lower courts
- Petição of Apple filed in May 2026
- Resposta from Epic delivered June 4, 2026
- Decisão on case acceptance expected in June or July
The confrontation between the two companies continues to shape discussions about market power in technology. Epic Games, known as Fortnite and Unreal Engine, positions the action as a defense of more open options for creators and consumers.
