Apple loses another Epic appeal

App Store rules are the whole fight here. Apple wants to keep control of how iPhone apps sell digital goods, and Epic wants that control broken. This week, Apple lost another attempt to slow the process down. The Ninth Circuit lifted a stay that had temporarily protected Apple, so the company has to keep allowing U.S. apps to link users to outside payment options without charging its old workaround fee — at least for now. (techcrunch.com) ### What actually changed this week? The immediate news is procedural, but it matters. Apple had won a temporary pause while it prepared a Supreme Court petition. Then Epic pushed back, and the Ninth Circuit reversed itself. The court said Apple had not shown good cause to keep the stay in place and had not shown irreparable harm from letting the case move forward. That means the lower-court process resumes while Apple tries its next appeal. (techcrunch.com) ### Why is Epic calling this a big win? Because the stay was buying Apple time. Without it, Apple has to live under the tougher version of the App Store rules right now. Developers in the U.S. can keep steering users to outside payment pages, and Apple cannot keep collecting the 27% commission it had tried to impose on those external purchases under its earlier “compliance” plan. That 27% number is the detail that made the whole dispute explode again. (cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov) ### Where did that 27% come from? This goes back to the original anti-steering injunction in the Epic case. Apple lost on that narrow point years ago, even though it won most of the broader antitrust fight. The injunction said Apple could not stop developers from telling users about other ways to pay. Apple responded by allowing links out — but then added a 27% fee and design restrictions that made those links much less useful. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers later found Apple in contempt, and the Ninth Circuit largely backed that view in its December 11, 2025 opinion. (cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov) ### Why did the courts think Apple crossed the line? Basically, the courts decided Apple followed the letter of the order just enough to say it complied, while undermining the point of the order in practice. The Ninth Circuit’s opinion said the 27% commission had a prohibitive effect and that Apple’s link restrictions also violated the injunction. That is a big deal, because it turns the dispute from “how should the rule be interpreted?” into “did Apple deliberately dodge it?” (cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov) ### Does this mean Apple lost the whole case? No. Apple is still trying to take the fight to the Supreme Court. But this week’s loss means Apple does not get to freeze the current rules while that happens. The district court can now keep working through the remand issues, including what — if anything — Apple can charge on purchases made outside the U.S. App Store. So the present setup is real, but it may not be final. (techcrunch.com) ### Why should developers care? Because this is the first real crack in the “Apple tax” on iPhone digital sales in the U.S. If developers can send users to the web without a near-identical commission, subscription apps, game makers, and media companies get real leverage. The catch is that nobody knows the final fee structure yet, so companies are operating in a temporary window. (techcrunch.com) ### Why should Apple care so much? Services revenue and platform control. If outside payments become normal and cheaper, Apple loses both money and influence over how digital commerce happens on iPhones. That is why Apple keeps fighting every step instead of treating this like a minor policy tweak. (cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov) ### Bottom line Apple did not just lose an appeal in the abstract. It lost a chance to pause a real change in how iPhone apps can sell things in the U.S. The bigger Supreme Court fight is still coming, but for now Epic has forced the App Store to stay more open than Apple wants. (techcrunch.com)