On April 29, local time, Epic Games announced new developments in its legal dispute with Apple regarding platform system fees. Apple's application for a stay of execution was rejected by the court, and Apple lost another round of planned delay tactics.
· As early as 2020, because Epic Games insisted on introducing third-party payment methods in its popular game "Fortnite", Apple reacted strongly and decided to directly remove "Fortnite" from the App Store, which triggered a long-term legal dispute between the two parties. Of course, another company, Google, was also involved in the lawsuit.
·Soon afterward in 2021, Apple lost the lawsuit and was forced to prohibit the establishment of obstacles to third-party payments and reset the fees for third-party payments.
·However, the lawsuit did not end so simply. Epic Games, who was still dissatisfied, continued to put pressure. On May 1, 2025, the court overturned the previous judgment and added a new judgment that directly prohibited Apple from collecting third-party payment fees.
·The case had twists and turns, and then on December 11, the new judgment was reversed. The court held that Apple had paid reasonable infrastructure construction costs to maintain the operation of the payment platform, and third-party payment should pay reasonable handling fees. It ordered Apple to calculate as soon as possible, which was relatively reasonable.
·However, Apple’s Legal Department still decided to continue the appeal and applied for a stay of execution, intending to delay the introduction of third-party payment process. On April 6 this year, the court approved Apple’s application, which once again aroused strong dissatisfaction from Epic Games. It believed that this was an infringement and disregard for the rights of developers and players to freely choose, and it was a common delaying tactic used by Apple to protect its own private interests.
·The latest motion was finally issued. The court overturned the judgment on April 6 and ordered Apple to establish a reasonable cost and fee ratio as soon as possible and not to continue to delay the execution of the judgment to introduce third-party payment. ·
