Apple is once again challenging the boundaries of its App Store policies, filing a reply brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The dispute centers on whether Apple must allow developers to direct users to outside payment platforms without facing additional fees. The company maintains that the court’s latest mandate overreaches and undermines its legal rights.
The legal battle began in 2021 when Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple had to permit links to third-party purchase options within apps. After years of back-and-forth appeals, Apple complied in 2024 but introduced new charges ranging from 12 to 27 percent for transactions completed through those links. Epic Games objected, labeling the fees unreasonable, and earlier this year the court sided with Epic’s position.
From Apple’s perspective, the injunction goes further than the original judgment required. The company argues that it strips away fair compensation for the use of its platform and compels it to present messages it does not endorse. Apple has also pointed to a recent Supreme Court precedent, Trump v. Casa, which limited broad injunctions. Based on that ruling, Apple insists that any restrictions should apply only to Epic, the sole plaintiff, rather than every developer.
At present, Apple must allow all U.S. developers to insert links leading to external payment sites without charging fees or imposing design rules. Should the appeals court rule in Apple’s favor, it could regain the ability to reintroduce commissions or adjust the App Store’s terms once more.
For developers, the outcome is critical. Many argue that Apple’s tight control suppresses competition and prevents them from offering lower-cost options directly to customers. Apple counters that the current order unfairly penalizes its business model and amounts to government overreach.
The Ninth Circuit’s decision will determine more than just the future of Apple and Epic’s rivalry—it could reshape how digital marketplaces operate. A ruling favoring Apple would restore its commission system, while a decision against it would cement broader freedoms for app makers across the U.S.