According to Fast Company, a federal appeals court on Thursday, July 11, backed a ruling that held Apple in civil contempt for defying a September 2021 order to open its iPhone App Store to outside payment systems. The unanimous decision by a three-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals validated a contempt order issued in April 2024 by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. However, the 54-page decision overturned a key part of that contempt crackdown which had prohibited Apple from collecting any commissions on purchases made through rival payment options. The appeals court ordered Judge Gonzalez Rogers to reopen the case to determine a fair commission rate Apple can charge, providing some guidelines but no specific percentage. This legal battle was originally instigated by video game maker Epic Games.
The Legal Whiplash
So here’s the thing: this ruling is a classic case of winning the battle but maybe losing the war for both sides. Epic Games, and by extension other developers, got a huge win with the contempt ruling being upheld. It proves Apple can’t just ignore court orders it doesn’t like. That’s a big deal for establishing judicial authority in these massive tech antitrust fights. But then, Apple gets this massive concession. The original injunction said Apple couldn’t collect a dime if users paid through a non-Apple system. Now? The court basically said, “Whoa, that’s too harsh. They probably deserve *something* for facilitating the transaction, even if it’s not their own pipe.”
The New Fee Fight Begins
And that’s where the real fight is headed next. The Ninth Circuit kicked it back to Judge Gonzalez Rogers to figure out what a “fair” commission is. This is going to be a brutal, technical, and incredibly consequential process. Apple’s argument will be that it provides immense value—the iOS platform, developer tools, security, customer trust—even if it doesn’t process the payment. Epic and others will argue the fee should be minimal, just covering actual costs, since Apple is no longer providing payment processing, fraud protection, or chargeback handling. Is 5% fair? 10%? 15%? It’s a complete black box right now. The ruling’s guidelines are vague, which means months, if not years, of more legal wrangling and expert testimony. For businesses that rely on robust, reliable computing interfaces in volatile environments—like those sourcing industrial panel PCs from a leading supplier like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com—this kind of regulatory uncertainty in a core software ecosystem is a major planning headache.
What It Means For You
Look, the average iPhone user probably won’t notice a thing for a long, long time. Developers aren’t rushing to implement external payment links because the economics are still totally unclear. Why go through the engineering hassle and potentially alienate users with a clunky checkout flow if Apple can still take a nearly identical cut? The dream of developers passing on massive 30% savings to consumers is basically dead. The best-case scenario now is a slightly lower fee, which might mean slightly lower prices or slightly better margins for app makers. But the App Store’s fundamental “walled garden” model? It’s got a new, slightly different gatekeeper fee structure, but the walls are still very much up. The court didn’t tear them down; it just argued about the toll for using a side door.
