Judge refers Apple to federal prosecutors for criminal contempt investigation, rules company violated App Store reform order

Apple breached a U.S. court order mandating increased competition for app downloads and payment methods in its App Store, a California federal judge ruled Wednesday, referring the case to federal prosecutors. In an 80-page decision, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland found Apple non-compliant with her earlier injunction from an antitrust lawsuit filed by Epic Games, creator of “Fortnite.”
Mike Scarcella for Reuters:
‎

“Apple’s continued attempts to interfere with competition will not be tolerated,” Gonzalez Rogers said. She added: “This is an injunction, not a negotiation. There are no do-overs once a party willfully disregards a court order.”
Gonzalez Rogers referred, opens new tab Apple and one of its executives, Alex Roman, vice president of finance, to federal prosecutors for a criminal contempt investigation into their conduct in the case.
Roman gave testimony about the steps Apple took to comply with her injunction that was “replete with misdirection and outright lies,” the judge wrote.
Apple in a statement said “we strongly disagree with the decision. We will comply with the court’s order and we will appeal.”
In Wednesday’s ruling, Gonzalez Rogers said Apple is immediately barred from impeding developers’ ability to communicate with users, and the company must not levy its new commission on off-app purchases.

Kif Leswing for CNBC:
‎

While Apple won the vast majority of counts in the original trial, Epic Games did win some concessions tucked inside a 180-page order. Rogers originally ordered the company to make changes to its app store, allowing software developers to link to their websites inside of iPhone apps for customers to make purchases outside of Apple’s ecosystem.
On Wednesday, Rogers accused Apple of willfully trying to violate her ruling, and she held the company in contempt.
Rogers wrote that it was expected under her ruling that those kind of off-app purchases would not have an Apple commission. But Apple introduced new policies in 2024 that collected a 27% commission from some of those purchases, only a slight discount from the 30% Apple usually collects from in-app purchases. Rogers said nearly every Apple decision on its app-linking policies was anticompetitive.

‎
MacDailyNews Take: It’s too bad Gonzalez Rogers expected Apple to provide a service that she ordered for free, because it makes no sense for Apple to do such a thing. Gonzales ordered Apple to allow developers to advertise lower prices elsewhere within Apple’s App Store. It is Apple’s App Store. Despite what Epic Games wishes and misrepresents, the App Store is not a public utility. Apple built it. Apple maintains it. Apple owns it, not Epic Games or some ditzy U.S. District Judge. Advertising within Apple’s App Store has value, a fee for which its owner has every right to charge, regardless of whatever the blank-eyed Gonzalez Rogers, bless her heart, expected.
In communist China, the CCP can set prices for Chinese companies. You’re in the wrong country, Yvonne.
Apple should appeal this rolling travesty all the way to the United States Supreme Court, if need be.
Rodgers says that Apple will no longer be allowed to prohibit developers from providing links or other communications that direct users away from Apple in-app purchasing.
You know, because Best Buy and Target are forced by a judge’s injunction to place signs next to each product that advertise lower prices for the same items at Walmart.
Oh, wait, they aren’t forced to do that by some ditzy judge. Because it’s ludicrous, illogical, and just plan wrong.
Apple should appeal Roger’s injunction and/or if developers like Epic Games want to advertise lower prices using Apple’s App Store, Apple should simply charge an in-store advertising fee. We suggest it be 15% for developers making under $1 million per year and 30% for those making $1 million or more annually.