Apple has asked the Supreme Court of the United States to pause the next phase of its long-running fight with Epic Games, as it tries to avoid a new ruling that could decide how much it can charge developers for purchases made outside the App Store, and the move directly targets the upcoming process where a lower court would examine Apple’s commission under a contempt label.
Apple is asking the court to do this
Apple filed an application to stay the mandate issued by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which would otherwise send the case back to a district court to determine a fair commission rate for external purchases, and the company says this pause is necessary because continuing now would force it to defend its business model under a contempt ruling it believes is flawed.
Don’t miss the best of The Mac Observer
Set us as a preferred source and our Apple reporting ranks higher in your Google Search results and Discover feed — one tap, no account changes.
Apple argues three key points:
- The original 2021 injunction never mentioned commissions on external purchases
- The contempt ruling wrongly interprets the “spirit” of that injunction
- The order applies too broadly to developers beyond Epic
Apple also says it faces real harm if the case continues at this stage, including the risk of exposing sensitive internal data and negotiating from a weakened legal position.
A Little Bit of Dispute Context
The case traces back to a 2021 injunction from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which required Apple to allow developers to link to alternative payment options outside the App Store, and Apple complied by allowing those links but still imposed a commission of up to 27 percent.
That decision led to a contempt ruling in 2025, where the court said Apple’s fee structure went against the intent of the injunction, even though the order itself did not clearly ban such charges, and this created the current legal tension that now sits between interpretation and enforcement.
Apple says it will continue to follow the injunction for now and will not charge commissions on external purchases during this review period, which means developers like Epic face no immediate financial impact if the Supreme Court grants the stay.
At the same time, Apple signals that it plans to formally ask the court to take up the full case, and it wants this pause to prevent further rulings that could shape global policy before that review happens.
Epic responds with global warning
Tim Sweeney reacted quickly and framed Apple’s move as part of a broader strategy.
“Regulators around the world are watching this case to determine what commission rate Apple may charge on covered purchases in huge markets outside the United States.”
Sweeney also claims Apple is delaying progress to influence global outcomes, and he points to regions like the EU, UK, Japan, and India as markets where this case could shape future rules, while his comments raise the stakes beyond a single legal dispute and turn it into a global platform battle that regulators are closely tracking.
The Supreme Court will now decide whether to pause the case, and that decision will determine if the lower court can proceed with setting a commission rate or if the entire process stalls while Apple pushes for a broader review, and the outcome will influence not just App Store rules in the US but also how regulators worldwide approach platform fees in the coming years.
Discussion