On Friday, Epic Games escalated its ongoing dispute with Apple by sending a pointed letter to U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. In the letter, Epic accused Apple of deliberately ignoring their submission for Fortnite, labeling this as “Apple’s latest attempt to circumvent this Court’s Injunction and this Court’s authority.”
“Apple’s refusal to consider Epic’s Fortnite submission is Apple’s latest attempt to circumvent this Court’s Injunction and this Court’s authority.” Epic is therefore seeking an order enforcing the Injunction, finding Apple in civil contempt yet again, and requiring Apple to promptly accept any compliant Epic app, including Fortnite, for distribution on the U.S. storefront of the App Store.
Epic Games highlighted a significant statement from Tim Cook during the trial, underscoring Cook’s assertion that reinstating Fortnite on the App Store would be beneficial for users. This emphasizes Epic’s stance that Apple’s actions are not only obstructive but contrary to user interests.
“It would be to the benefit of the users to have Fortnite back on the App Store.”
Furthermore, Epic points out that Apple previously assured both the Court and Epic that Fortnite could return to the App Store if Epic adhered to all of Apple’s guidelines—a stipulation Epic claims to have fulfilled.
“Apple also expressly and repeatedly told both this Court and Epic that it would welcome Fortnite back to the App Store if Epic complied with all of Apple’s Guidelines. That is exactly what Epic did.”
Context of the Dispute
This legal maneuver comes after Apple’s insistence that it would not reconsider its ban on Epic’s developer account until U.S. litigation concludes. Recently, Epic notified players that its newest Fortnite build was blocked by Apple, effectively making the game unavailable globally on iOS until the matter is resolved. Apple, however, claims that it only requested adjustments to the submission to keep Fortnite accessible in other regions.
Future Implications
In earlier hearings, Judge Rogers expressed skepticism about requiring Apple to permit Fortnite back on the App Store. Despite Epic’s previous failures in securing an injunction, this latest request insists the judge take a more assertive stance against Apple’s refusals. For the judge to grant this, she would likely need to determine that Apple’s continued inaction constitutes contempt of court, despite her prior remarks that Apple is not obliged to host the game.
Epic’s recent efforts may gain traction due to Judge Rogers’ ruling emphasizing compliance with a previous injunction from 2021. During this protracted standoff, Epic has employed social media to draw attention to the situation, hoping to compel Apple into action. However, this new legal approach indicates Epic is prepared to press further for a resolution on its Fortnite submission.
FTC: We use income-earning auto affiliate links. More.
Epic Games Takes Legal Action Against Apple Over Fortnite’s App Store Status
In a recent development, Epic Games has formally accused Apple of delaying the reinstatement of its popular game, Fortnite, on the App Store. This allegation was presented in a letter to U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, in which Epic claims Apple is attempting to sidestep court orders related to the game’s availability.
Allegations of Court Circumvention
Epic Games contends that Apple’s refusal to process its latest Fortnite submission represents an effort to bypass a court-issued injunction. In the letter, Epic seeks a ruling that would compel Apple to accept any compliant app, including Fortnite, for distribution on the U.S. App Store.
“Apple’s refusal to consider Epic’s Fortnite submission is Apple’s latest attempt to circumvent this Court’s Injunction and this Court’s authority,” the letter states.
Tim Cook’s Testimony Highlights User Benefits
The document also draws attention to statements made by Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, during a trial. Cook indicated that having Fortnite available on the App Store would benefit users. This testimony serves as a crucial point in Epic’s argument that Apple should rectify its actions.
“It would be to the benefit of the users to have Fortnite back on the App Store,” Cook has stated.
Claims of Compliance by Epic Games
Epic Games emphasizes that Apple previously assured both the court and Epic that Fortnite could be reinstated once it adhered to Apple’s guidelines. The company asserts that it has complied with all requirements set forth by Apple.
“Apple also expressly and repeatedly told this Court and Epic that it would welcome Fortnite back to the App Store if Epic complied,” Epic’s letter asserts.
Context of the Ongoing Dispute
This legal action follows Apple’s announcement that it will not reconsider the status of Epic’s developer account until after the conclusion of ongoing litigation. Epic Games also reported that Apple has blocked its most recent Fortnite build, preventing access to the game on iOS platforms worldwide.
Apple has countered Epic’s claims by stating that it merely requested modifications to the build for it to remain accessible in other regions.
What Lies Ahead in This Legal Battle
Looking back at earlier hearings, Judge Rogers expressed hesitancy in requiring Apple to permit Fortnite on its platform. However, Epic’s latest motion seeks to push the boundaries of this legal standoff. If the judge finds Apple in contempt of court, she could mandate a reversal of the existing restrictions on Fortnite.
This ongoing saga is underscored by a recent court order emphasizing Apple’s obligation to comply with earlier injunctions. With Epic employing social media strategies to apply pressure, the company’s efforts may be shifting towards a more aggressive legal approach.
Conclusion: The Future of Fortnite on the App Store
The resolution of this conflict carries significant implications not only for Epic Games but also for the broader landscape of app distribution on platforms like Apple’s App Store. As both parties prepare for potential next steps, many in the gaming community and tech industry await this pivotal development with great anticipation.
