Apple, Epic looks for re-examination of April’s antitrust choice
We may receive compensation if you make a purchase after clicking one of our links. To learn more about how we make decisions as editors, please go here.
Each company has filed a separate petition asking a panel of 11 judges to reconsider the dispute.
Subscribe to the GI Daily and have all the latest and greatest stories sent straight to your inbox.
Both Apple and Epic Games have filed motions asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its antitrust case ruling from April.
Reuters reports that both firms have filed legal petitions. Each party has sought for an 11-person “en banc” meeting of the same three-judge panel that issued the ruling in April.
Part of Apple’s new petition is that Epic did not provide enough evidence that the practises affected it.
Apple stated that the panel’s error was compounded by the fact that it upheld a nationwide UCL (California’s Unfair Competition Law) injunction in a case brought by a private, non-representative complainant who had not suffered any injury at all, let alone the kind of injury that would warrant classwide relief.
According to a court filing by Impressive, Apple’s option to exclude all competitors for in-app sales and instead charge designers a licence fee was considered. The document expressed concern that the ruling might establish a dangerous precedent.
That high standard might maybe work if the competitive benefits and damages of the walled-garden approach are fully considered at a final balancing decision’, the petition read.
“But it clearly weakens the antitrust laws to embrace a guideline where any practise that conserves administrative expenses is eventually greenlighted, no matter how exclusionary or just how much customer damage it creates.”
Reuters took note of the fact that requests to hear cases “en banc” are unusual; only 12 of 646 petitions filed in 2015 were granted.
Almost two months after Apple’s appeal against Epic’s antitrust claim was successful, Apple is now asking for a reexamination of the case.
The 2021 ruling that invalidated nine out of ten of Epic’s claims was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
According to the ruling, Apple continued to violate California’s anti-steering legislation by diverting app users to different payment methods.
Check out our comparison of Epic and Apple for additional details.
Subscribe to the GI Daily and have the most important stories sent to your inbox every day.
Add to favorites