Apple and Epic, in separate court filings, mounted
challenges to a ruling by a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US
Circuit Court of Appeals. Lawyers for the two companies said the panel should
rehear the case or the court should convene "en banc," as an 11-judge
panel, to reconsider the dispute.
The April three-judge ruling upheld a 2021 order in
California federal court in Epic's lawsuit which accused Apple of unlawfully
requiring software developers to pay up to 30 percent in commissions on
consumers' in-app purchases.
The trial judge found that Apple violated a California state
unfair competition law, but not US antitrust provisions. Apple's new filing
challenged a nationwide injunction over conduct Apple said was
"procompetitive and does not violate the antitrust laws."
Epic's 9th Circuit filing argued that its claims against
Apple directly implicate the "core purpose" of US antitrust law to
foster competition. Epic also argued that the appeals court did not conduct a
"rigorous" balancing between asserted consumer benefits and
anticompetitive effects of Apple's practices.
Federal appeals courts do not often grant en banc requests.
Last year, the 9th Circuit received 646 petitions asking the court for en banc
rehearings. During that period, the court granted 12 requests. In 2021, the
court granted en banc review in nine cases.
The US Supreme Court could have the final say on the
outcome.
Representatives for Apple and Epic had no immediate comment.
The lower court ruling is on hold pending further appellate
proceedings.
US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers' ruling said Apple
could not bar App Store developers from providing links and buttons that direct
consumers to payment options outside of Apple's in-app purchase system.
Gonzalez Rogers did not provide any direction on how Apple
must allow those links or buttons.
Competition authorities in other countries, including South
Korea, the Netherlands and Japan, have taken steps to force Apple to open up
its in-app payment systems. © Reuters