Fortnite on iPhone
Apple responded to Epic's contempt charge for failing to remove anti-regulatory measures at its own discretion, insisting that he is actually following orders.
On March 13, the Epic vs. Apple saga continued when Epic asked the court to hold Apple liable for contempt of court. The Fortnite creator argued that Apple did not properly implement a court order allowing developers to link to external payment platforms, also known as Apple's anti-steering rules.
The new motion, filed Friday and reviewed by Reuters, contradicts Epic's request to enforce the injunction. It tells the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California that Epic's complaint is “meritless.”
Apple already told the court it had complied with the requirements in January by allowing developers to apply for the right to provide a link to a website the developer controls or owns. However, Epic believed that this compliance measure was a “sham” because Apple still wanted to prevent developers from using alternatives to the App Store with its restrictions.
As part of Apple's linking requirements, which were limited to iOS and iPadOS apps in the US App Store, developers had to prove that products purchased through an external link were intended for in-app use. Developers also had to provide methods for disputing unauthorized transactions, managing subscriptions and requesting refunds,” as well as paying Apple fees.
Fees and profits
In Friday's motion, Apple believes Epic wanted the court “micromanaged Apple's business operations in a manner that enhanced Epic's profitability.”
Apple “developed and implemented the right to external links for purchases in accordance with the court order” will continue to ensure the safety and security of the App Store for users, they added.
“Epic's offering is its latest attempt to gain access to the iOS platform and user base for free,” Apple says. “Epic doesn't even propose an alternative amount that Apple should be allowed to charge developers for using and accessing its tools and technologies.”
The court has already rejected arguments from Epic's friends, Apple notes, “who are large developers” whom Apple accuses of seeking to “increase its own profits without caring about consumers or the integrity of the iOS ecosystem.”
Apple believes that Epic's request for an injunction “does not address or provide an opportunity to review the decision.”
The lawsuit goes on to say that Epic had the burden of clearly establishing that Apple failed to make a good faith effort to comply with the injunction, which Apple says Epic failed to do. “The overwhelming evidence establishes Apple's good faith compliance with the injunction,” he concludes.
Follow AppleInsider on Google News.
