Tech leaders Meta, Microsoft, X, and Match Group are challenging Apple’s app store policies, accusing the company of favoring its own apps and hindering competition. This dispute is a response to a court order that promotes competitive balance, which they claim Apple is breaching.
The Supreme Court-backed order arose from a legal squabble between Apple and Epic Games. It requires Apple to let app developers inform their users about offers and discounts, bypassing Apple’s app store. This decision poses significant challenges to Apple’s app store revenue model and is seen as a victory for app developers globally.
In their submission, the alliance says that Apple’s proposed compliance strategy still exhibits anti-competitive behavior. They assert that Apple’s new limitations prevent app developers from engaging in price competition, the court order aimed to incentivize. By doing so, Apple’s changes compel developers to charge higher prices, thereby stifling competition and limiting consumer choice.
The alliance, hence, demands an interpretation of the court ruling that encourages more competition. Such a competition-prone environment would not only benefit the application developers but also be advantageous to consumers.
Backing the consortium is Epic Games, which had lodged a lawsuit against Apple after Fortnite was pulled from Apple’s store due to a payment dispute. Epic insists that Apple breaches the court’s order to fix anti-competitive practices. Several entities have voiced their support for Epic in its bid to change what they perceive as anti-competitive behavior.
Firms like Meta, Microsoft, X, and Match Group have criticized Apple’s approach. They argue that Apple’s policy hinders them from suggesting alternative payment methods or improved subscription services to users, thereby stifling the revenue of independent content creators.
Despite promising to revise its app store policies in January to allow non-Apple controlled payment methods, the tech giant still faces criticism. The alliance suggests the changes proposed by Apple would merely tweak the existing setup and not break its monopoly on in-app purchase, which could continue to limit competition.
