Apple returns to court in ongoing Fortnite-App Store dispute

Apple argues that recent court rulings on App Store payments overstep legal boundaries in its dispute with Epic Games.

Apple has made another court appearance in its ongoing dispute with Epic Games over App Store policies, following a recent injunction that expanded the 2021 ruling against the company. The legal conflict began in 2020, when Epic was removed from the App Store for implementing a Fortnite update that bypassed Apple’s In-App Purchase system.

After years of litigation, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled in April that Apple had failed to comply with her original 2021 decision. The injunction required Apple to permit alternative payment methods in apps without collecting its usual 27% commission. Apple promptly appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, marking its second attempt to overturn or limit the judge’s directives.

In its appeal, Apple argues that the April injunction exceeded judicial authority and violated established legal limits on civil contempt powers. The company seeks either to reverse the April order and reassign the case to a new judge or to vacate the original 2021 injunction entirely. Apple’s filing states:

“The injunction breaches well-established guardrails on the civil contempt power, and its sweeping new restrictions on Apple violate several independent limits, including the Constitution itself… This Court should reverse the district court’s contempt order and denial of Apple’s Rule 60(b)(5) motion. In the alternative, the court should vacate the new injunction and reassign this case to a different district judge for any further proceedings necessitated by this Court’s decision.”

As reported by Bloomberg, Apple presented its arguments in court today, seeking a more favorable outcome than in 2024, when Judge Rogers’ original 2021 ruling was upheld. Details of the deposition are not yet public, but it is expected that both Apple and Epic Games will continue to provide updates and arguments in the coming days.

This case remains a key point in discussions around App Store regulations, developer fees, and the broader debate over the control platform holders have over digital marketplaces. Both companies are likely to keep intensifying their positions as the litigation continues, with implications for the app economy and software distribution models worldwide.