Concurrent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s January 16 decision not to hear the appeal in Epic vs. Apple, the iPhone maker has revised its App Store rules, letting developers link to outside payment platforms. While that ostensibly lets third parties circumvent Apple’s unpopular payment processing fee of up to 30 percent, the tech giant says it will still collect a premium of up to 27 percent using a “commission” structure. That workaround has Epic founder and CEO Tim Sweeney vowing to continue litigating the case in U.S. District Court.

Indeed, the December outcome of the appeal of a case in which Epic ostensibly prevailed was so unsatisfactory that both sides petitioned the Supreme Court, which denied cert with no explanation.

“The changes reform Apple’s guidelines to relax its anti-steering rules that have previously prohibited developers from linking to alternative payment systems in their apps,” writes 9to5Mac, explaining that “the changes Apple is making to the App Store Guidelines apply in the United States” and are “similar to the changes Apple previously made specifically for dating applications in the Netherlands.”

The Apple App Store rules update lets developers apply for an entitlement to include a link to alternative payment methods. Entitlements will only be granted for alternative payment apps that “also offer purchases through Apple’s own In-App Purchase system,” per 9to5Mac, which clarifies “that an app can’t include links to alternative payment platforms if that app doesn’t also use Apple’s In-App Purchase system.”

Apparently, that loop back to participation in Apple’s In-App Purchase system allows Apple to “charge a commission on purchases made through alternative payment platforms. This commission will be 12 percent for developers who are a member of the App Store Small Business Program and 27 percent for other apps,” writes 9to5Mac, which extensively documents Apple’s language with regard with the change, including templated developer docs Apple is providing for developers’ customer communications regarding payment alternatives.

“Apple is still taking its 27 percent cut, even if users buy digital goods and services from a website linked from within an app,” reports The Verge, summing up what has reignited Sweeney’s ire. The games CEO is critical of Apple’s compliance with U.S. District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers’ 2021 decision, saying “Epic will contest Apple’s bad-faith compliance plan in District Court.”

Epic initiated its now-famous suit against Apple in 2020. The following year a U.S. District Court rejected Epic’s antitrust claims, but ruled that “Apple violated California’s Unfair Competition Law by barring developers from ‘steering’ users to make digital purchases that bypass Apple’s in-app system,” per Reuters. Epic argued that payments outside of Apple’s in-app portal could save consumers money.

“The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld much of [Judge Yvonne Gonzalez] Rogers’ decision in 2023, finding that Epic had ‘failed to prove the existence of substantially less restrictive alternatives’ to Apple’s system,” Reuters adds.

Related:
What Apple Had to Change as a Result of the Epic Games Legal Battle, CNBC, 1/16/24
Apple Seeks $73.4 Million in Fees from Epic Games Antitrust Fight, Reuters, 1/17/24
Supreme Court Denies Review of Apple and Epic Games Antitrust Appeals, Forbes, 1/16/24
Apple Turned Its Epic Defeat Into Another App Store Victory, Wired, 1/18/24
Apple Excludes Video and News Partners from New App Store Rules, TechCrunch, 1/18/24
Apple Video Program Partners Can’t Bypass App Store In-App Payment Requirement, Variety, 1/18/24