Read the most juicy bits of the court ruling against Apple due to the practices of the anti -competition application store

Judge IPhone Gonzalez Rogers is angry in Apple. truly, truly Well.

In the newly released Rogers decision, Apple and its executives took the task of challenging the court’s orders in it. The original case with Fortnite Maker Epic games. Although Apple has largely won this tour, as it was determined that the technology giant was not monopolized, the court decided that Apple was acting in an anti -competition manner in a specific field: by not allowing application developers to provide other customers to pay outside the Apple payment platform.

The judge has eliminated that the developers should be able to link with other ways to make purchases from within their applications, so that they can process payments through their website and payment systems. When doing this, developers should have been able to give up the Apple Committee by 30 % on the application operations.

However, Apple has made more accurate for any developers who chose this option. Its commission has been dropped only to 27 % of these external purchases, and added “Brewglings”: warnings to bend clients who may have been seduced by walking on the path of external purchases. With only 3 % discount of the original Apple commission, this method may end at the cost of developers more when their payment processing fees were taken into account.

As a result, Apple has protected the profitable application store model at the expense of its reputation, its relationship to the IOS developer community, and its good place in the eyes of the law.

In Rogers’s decision, it is clear that she had enough Apple tactics, and the judgment is full of modern tales as it clearly expresses it.

Apple replied to the court ruling in the following statement: “We disagree strongly with the decision. We will abide by the court’s order and we will appeal.”

If you don’t have time to read all the eighty pages yourself, we have collected some of the best bits below. (Focus is ours).

The judge invites Apple to try to guidance about its original orders

“Apple’s response to the pressures of the credibility. After two groups of the demonstration hearings, the truth appeared. Apple, although its obligations according to it, thwarted the goals of the gossip, and continued its anti -preserved behavior. He will not see through clear cover -up (Hearing 2024.

The judge accuses Apple of being more aggressive than competitiveness and lying under the section

“In a blatant contradiction with the initial Apple certificate within the court, contemporary business documents reveal that Apple knew exactly what she was doing, and at each turn she chose the most competitive option. To hide the truth, Vice President Finance, Alex Roman, Explicit lying under the oath.“

Cook is badly chosen: The CEO of Slams Tim Cook is to listen to the advice of the financial manager

“Internally, Philip Schiller called for compliance with Apple with a judicial order, but Tim Cook ignored Schiller and instead allowed financial manager Luka Maestri and his financial team to persuade him otherwise. Choose a bad Cook … the court refers to the US lawyer in the northern province of California to investigate whether criminal contempt procedures are appropriate. “

…

“Since Mr. Schiller was not defending a committee, Mr. MASTRI was fully defending the profitable approach, and Mr. Cook was the broken.”

(Which person notices that Maestri is no longer in Apple anymore, by the way?)

“This is a judicial matter, not negotiations,” says Judge Apple will agree now

“This is a judicial matter, not negotiations. There is nothing as soon as the party intentionally ignores the court. The time is essence. The court will not tolerate more delay. As required previously, Apple will not hinder competition. The court provides for Apple from the implementation of its new anti -competition work to avoid compliance with the judges. Apple will not immediately impede the ability of developers to communicate with users, and they will not impose or impose a new commission on the purchases outside the application. “

The judge says that Apple has delayed procedures to protect its profits

“Apple has been involved in tactics to delay the procedures. The court later concluded that the delay equivalent to profits.”

“… ultimately, EPIC and Apple rented three special professors to review the Apple Franchise Claims after reconsideration. (See, for example, DKT.

…

“The court also finds that Apple’s abuse of the customer’s privilege to delay the procedures and hide the decision -making process He requests a punishment to deter future misconduct. Apple is punished with the full cost of a special master’s review and EPIC lawyer fees on this issue alone during May 15, 2025, the expected completion date. The two parties must meet and refer to the actual amount due. “

Apple hidden the decision -making process from the court

“In its simplest composition,” associated purchases “after the gangle is the purchases from the Apple platform, but the consumer can leave the platform using a link on the application” digital transactions and services that take place on the developer site within seven days after the user is launched through an external purchase link. … Apple hidden the decision -making process It is only the court to discover it in the second evidence session in 2025. “

…

“Apple coded its activities related to the judges Michigan Project“… when the ninth circle issued its residence on the update order on December 8, 2021 (DKT. No. 841), it seems that Apple has stopped any compliance efforts.”

Apple knew that she did not correspond to the irritable matter

“Despite the fact that the court now has evidence that Apple has achieved in the scene, she knew how to harm the developers, and understood that it will not comply with the goal of the irony, however, the Apple is specific at the June 20 2023 meeting that it will receive a committee on the purchases of the correlation, although it has not yet decided this committee … knowing Apple and looking at these problems these problems It was hidden from the court It was not revealed until the 2025 session.

Judge Vice President Alex Roman, Alex Roman, says a lies under the department

The testimony of Mr. Roman, Vice President of Finance, It was full of wrong guidance and explicit lies. He even went to testify that Apple did not look at the comparisons to estimate the costs of alternative payment solutions that developers will need to buy to facilitate associated purchases. “

…

“Mr. Roman did not stop there. He also witnessed this until January 16, 2024, Apple had no idea about the fees that he would impose on related purchases:

Q: I consider that Apple decided to impose a 27 percent fee on the purchases associated before January 16, 2024, right?

The decision was made on that day.

Q: It is your testimony until January 16, 2024, Apple had no idea about what – what are the drawings that you will impose on the related purchases?

This is correct. “

Another lie under the section: Contemporary business documents reveal that on the contrary, the main components of the Apple plan, including 27 % committee, were identified in July 2023.

Apple, nor her lawyer, is not correct, clear now. They did not seek to withdraw the certificate or be injured (although the Apple requested that the court will strike another certificate). Thus, Apple will be built to adopt lies and distort this court. “

Apple has made its scary screens more terrifying

“Apple has published a warning message, referred to as” intimidation screen “, to deter users from using third -party payment options.”

…

“The screen on the right is called” paper “, which is a acquisition process on the screen after the user clicks on my external
connection. Moving from left to right, the user’s warning level increases. Once again, Apple has chosen the most competitive option, that is, the acquisition of the screen. “

…

“Once again, Apple decided the most competitive option, that is, the” worst “option to include the name of the developer instead of the application name. All this was hidden from the court and was not disclosed in the demonstration hearing in May 2024.”

“A few developers registered for the correlation program (external purchase links).”

As of the hearing in May 2024, only 34 developers out of about 136,000 developers in the application store applied for the program, and seventeen of these developers did not provide purchases inside the application in the first place. I tried Apple here to mislead.“

The court believes that Apple has violated the message and spirit of the upholstery

“There are many problems related to the argument of Apple. First, it is to make you expect that any court of 180 pages has been issued in conjunction with one judicial order at the same time. Apple has violated the literal text. Third, unlike the Apple position, other courts in this and other circuits will consider the spirit of the irritation when the litigant applies a literal interpretation of a doubtful matter, especially when this interpretation is designed to evade the goals of the Zargi. “

…

“In short, the Apple behavior lacks any justification: it does not correspond to the text of the dysfunction, and requires a tense and skeptical explanation in that language, and this court is completely ignored from 180 pages, and it requires that Apple be on the scale allowed for the ninth behavior of the permitted behavior of vitality.

The court says that the requirements for correlation are not justified

“Apple justifications for these requirements (shown above) Screaming. The most prominent, and to confirm the uncompromising Apple justifications, do not require Apple from developers who sell physical goods to apply for a bond before the publication of correlation transactions. Apple imposes these restrictions only on the links that compete with IAP. “

The court carries Apple in contempt

“Apple’s behavior violates the irregular matter. Lack of compliance was far from“ technology or minimum. ”Apple’s lack of sufficient justification, knowledge of the economic lack of approval of the compliance program for it, and a motive to protect the illegal revenue flow and put a new anti -competition structure, then create a reverse justification for engineering to apply The court, in any scientist, real or virtual, cannot view it as a product of goodwill Or a reasonable explanation for the orders of the court. The court carries Apple in civil contempt. Penalties and relief in relation to non -compliance with the IV specific Apple. “

…

“Apple has been unit in intent to not comply with this court. He did so with It expresses an intention to create new anti -competition barriers Which, through design and in fact, maintain the flow of valuable revenues; The flow of revenue that was previously found to be anti -competition. It believes that this court will tolerate such a rebellion was a serious miscalculation. As always, make covering up worse. For this court, there is no second bite in apples. “