Gonzalez Rogers is contemplating pursuing criminal contempt proceedings against Apple for its legal violations. The document also accuses Apple’s vice president of finance of having “outright lied under oath” regarding the 27% fees.
In response, Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, announced on X that the company plans to reinstate Fortnite in the US iOS App Store next week. Furthermore, he stated that if Apple eliminates the third-party payment fee on a global scale, Epic Games would relaunch Fortnite worldwide on the iOS App Store and cease all current and future litigation on this matter. Fortnite has been unavailable on iOS since 2020 due to Apple’s decision to block it following Epic Games’ attempt to bypass the payment fee.
However, for Fortnite to return to the App Store, it must first receive Apple’s approval like any other application. Although Apple previously blocked one of Epic Games’ developer accounts, Sweeney mentioned that the company has alternative accounts available for use to submit Fortnite for approval. “We just have to see what Apple does,” he stated. “Apple could arbitrarily reject Epic from the App Store even if we follow all the rules. However, they would face various consequences for that.”
When Fortnite was removed from the App Store, Epic Games introduced the Tart Tycoon skin, representing its ongoing conflict with Apple, depicting a businessman with an apple for a head. Sweeney revealed that Epic Games is preparing a second skin in hopes of resolving the situation with Apple. “If we reach a resolution with Apple, we might be able to offer our players the chance to earn the Pine Patron outfit,” Sweeney said, though Epic Games did not provide further details on the Pie Patron skin.
Apple appears to disagree with the ruling, suggesting that the Pie Patron skin may not be forthcoming; while the company did not respond to Polygon’s inquiries, a spokesperson informed The Verge that it “strongly disagree[s] with the decision” and intends to comply with the order while appealing it.
Effective immediately, Apple is prohibited from imposing fees, restricting or preventing developers from linking to external purchases, or using “scare screens” to deter users from leaving the app.
“Apple willfully chose not to comply with this Court’s injunction,” Gonzalez Rogers stated. “It did so with the clear intent to create new anticompetitive barriers, designed to maintain a revenue stream that was previously determined to be anticompetitive. Their belief that this Court would tolerate such insubordination was a significant miscalculation. As always, the cover-up made the situation worse. For this Court, there is no second chance.”
