Epic Games v. Apple judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers just ruled that, effective immediately, Apple is no longer allowed to collect fees on purchases made outside apps and blocks the company from restricting how developers can point users to where they can make purchases outside of apps. Apple says it will appeal the order.

The ruling was issued as part of Epic Games’ ongoing legal dispute against Apple, and it’s a major victory for Epic’s arguments. Gonzalez Rogers also says that Apple “willfully” chose not to comply with her previous injunction from her original 2021 ruling. “That [Apple] thought this Court would tolerate such insubordination was a gross miscalculation,” Gonzalez Rogers says.

The judge also referred the case to the US attorney to review it for possible criminal contempt proceedings.

As part of the ruling, the judge says that Apple cannot:

  • Impose “any commission or any fee on purchases that consumers make outside an app”
  • Restrict developers’ style, formatting, or placement of links for purchases outside of an app
  • Block or limit the “use of buttons or other calls to action”
  • Interfere with consumers’ choice to leave an app with anything beyond “a neutral message apprising users that they are going to a third-party site”

Apple’s senior director of corporate communications, Olivia Dalton, sent a statement to The Verge that reads, “We strongly disagree with the decision. We will comply with the court’s order and we will appeal.”

    • TCB13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Side loading is a pile of shit designed to make it appear that you’re freedom and you aren’t locked into the store when in fact, you are. They still charge bullshit charges, force app notarization etc.

      Apple should be forced by someone to turn iOS into what macOS currently is, that is, a system with the ability to run ANY generic non-signed binary if the users chooses to do so. They can burry it under the settings, force people to accept a bunch of warnings but we should be able to run unsigned code.

      The current state of things is bullshit, Apple is very good at sandboxing, they can keep the system signed, secure and intact while allowing unsigned code to run.

      • pineapple@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I don’t understand. Side loading is great i don’t need to use the Google play store on Android any more I can use obtanium, accresent and f-droid that’s not possible on ios.

        • TCB13@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          You don’t understand, because side loading in iOS doesn’t not work like it does in Android - not even close. Side loading in iOS is full of restrictions, apps that only work for 3 days and require reinstall etc. And it all still requires binaries to be signed with a valid certificate approved by Apple.

          • pineapple@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Sorry I didn’t realise you were talking about iPhone side loading specifically. But dang IOS side loading is really bad, the eu could have done something to at least enforce a side loading feature that was useful.

            • TCB13@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Apple carefully made it in a way that complies with the law but doesn’t really change anything. And imposed small charges and requirements here and there com make it totally impractical.

      • davel@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        Apple makes MacOS a little bit more like iOS on every update 😔

      • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        they can keep the system signed, secure and intact

        If you cannot set up your own signed, secure and intact system outside of the one Apple controls, none of those matter. If they truly gave a shit about security they would do what Linux does and allow anyone to self host their entire software infrastructure including package repositories, or at the very least do what Android does and allow installing of other app stores (including one you can self host). Signed, secure and intact are worthless if you are forced to trust someone else’s app store and signatures.

        Of course the real reason they do this is to prevent people from 1, running pirated versions of paid apps, and 2, bypassing their in app purchase commission. DRM to ensure they get their cut. Signed, secure and intact have not a damn thing to do with it.

        • TCB13@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          a system with the ability to run ANY generic non-signed binary if the users chooses to do so

          I guess you didn’t read this part.

          allow installing of other app stores

          Because this is all good, but it is way more simple for Apple to allow us to run unsigned code than to come up with all the infrastructure so you can sign your apps without 3rd parties.

  • balsoft@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Honestly who cares. IDGAF if some shitty corpo has to pay another shitty corpo a cut to sell stuff on second corpo devices or not. I don’t think it would materially affect pricing, it would just serve to increase profits of sellers. Either way the user is stuck in a walled garden curated by Apple to make sure you can only get corporate proprietary overpriced bullshit. If they forced Apple to allow sideloading/alternative app stores, and also EU got its shit together and enforced user-replaceable batteries, I might consider an iPhone.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t think it would materially affect pricing, it would just serve to increase profits of sellers.

      Since when in our capitalist history has any corporation willfully given up any cut of profit for any reason? Of course they will pass this on to the customers, and the customers will gleefully eat it because their favorite merchandiser masters will it from them.

      • balsoft@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        “Created”? There’s been a duopoly since the inception of smartphone. This ruling does literally nothing to change that. Even sideloading wouldn’t fully fix that. The only true fix is to force manufacturers to provide an unlocked bootloader and drivers (at least binaries), but I can’t see this happening.

        • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          There is only one Phone on the earth that supports lots of features for disabled people. Its the IPhone. Its a monopoly.

        • quetzaldilla@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          The true fix is that politics and regulations matter, and we can’t just exchange memes all day long without ever getting involved in politics.

          Because if we do not, someone else will, and chances are it’s gonna be someone looking to personally profit from our exploitation.

          • balsoft@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Yeah, kind of. However under capitalism getting regulations passed is at best a temporary fix until the capitalist hands out enough bribes. Unless by “getting involved in politics” you mean “join your local socialist party”.

            • quetzaldilla@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Run for office.

              I’m thinking about it myself, I’m no less capable than a lot of these clowns.

              And no corpo can buy ever possibly buy me.

              I’ve played Cyberpunk and I ain’t interested in that kind of future.