Apple Will Appeal Contempt Ruling in Epic Games Case Over App Store (reuters.com) 15
Apple on Monday lodged an appeal to challenge a U.S. judge's ruling that ordered the tech company to immediately open its lucrative App Store to more competition. From a report: Apple in a court notice it will ask the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the April 30 ruling, which found the company in contempt of an earlier order in a 2020 antitrust lawsuit brought by Epic Games.
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said in her decision that Apple willfully failed to comply with a 2021 injunction designed to allow developers to more easily steer consumers to potentially cheaper non-Apple payment options. Gonzalez Rogers also referred Apple and one of its executives to federal prosecutors for a possible criminal contempt investigation.
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said in her decision that Apple willfully failed to comply with a 2021 injunction designed to allow developers to more easily steer consumers to potentially cheaper non-Apple payment options. Gonzalez Rogers also referred Apple and one of its executives to federal prosecutors for a possible criminal contempt investigation.
not news (Score:5, Insightful)
If Apple wasn't going to appeal, that would be news.
Corporation with piles of cash will appeal result they didn't like is not news. It's just business.
Re: (Score:2)
BREAKING NEWS - rain discovered to be wet.
Re: (Score:2)
BREAKING NEWS - rain discovered to be wet.
That would be breaking news. Rain is not wet. Rain makes things wet. That's a big difference.
Re: (Score:2)
What if a rain drop hits another rain drop? Wouldn't that make that second rain drop wet? And how can you really define which rain drop hit which rain drop, so really, each made the other wet.
Here's a news flash: And retentive booger eater is anal retentive while eating boogers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
More than that, it's not like they're paying massive legal fees. They have in-house lawyers that are on salary, and they're paying them whether they're in court or not.
They may have some extra costs if using outside counsel, but we're talking about Apple here - they don't give a shit about a few million in order to prevent a bad outcome stemming from bad behavior.
Re: (Score:3)
They may have some extra costs if using outside counsel,
There will be costs for inside counsel, too, like filing fees, and the cost of printing out documents, stenographers, etc.
But they probably - literally - spend more on coffee for their corporate office.
Toss That Appeal (Score:5, Insightful)
While the changes to their app store seem excessive, this is in response to a deliberate attempt to ignore or circumvent the previous sanctions.
They need to be taught a lesson. Corporations rarely learn anything unless it affects their bottom line. And this contempt ruling hit it hard.
FA,FO (Score:3)
I particularly like how the contempt investigation would be targeted at a specific individual at (overtly arrogant) Apple, so they get taught the 'FAFO' lesson.
Re: (Score:2)
As it should. Corporations limit civil liability, but they do not protect criminal behaviour.
Re: (Score:1)