Explainer-What’s next for Apple after US court’s contempt order in Epic Games case?

Written by Mike Skarsella

(Reuters) – Apple is facing a potential possible investigation of criminal contempt after an American judge said he violated an order to open a profitable application store for further competition and the court has been misled.

Below is a look at how Apple reaches here and what comes after that in the short lawsuit filed by “Fortnite” games.

What did the judge say?

American boycott judge, iPhone Gonzalez Rogers, in Auckland on Wednesday that Apple was in violation of a “deliberate” judicial order issued in 2021 in a lawsuit against the monopoly filed by the epic games.

A lawsuit against EPIC was filed in 2020 to alleviate Apple’s control of transactions in applications that use iOS operating system and how to distribute applications to consumers. The previous judge’s order from Apple is required to give developers more energy to direct the application users to non -Apple payment options that avoid Apple commission by 30 %.

Apple failed to persuade the United States Supreme Court to cancel the resurrection order, and entered into force in early 2024. The new ruling on whether Apple had complied with the conditions of the Zarbish order.

The judge accused Apple of “rebellion” and said he tried to cover up the decision -making process from the court.

What should Apple do now?

Apple said that Apple has to end many practices that it said is designed to circumvent its Al -Zarji order, including new fees by 27 % that it imposed on application developers when Apple clients complete the purchase of an application outside the application store.

The company also prevented the use of “fear screens” to deter consumers from using third -party payment options. Apple denied violating the terms of the court order.

Why did the judge refer criminal contempt?

In addition to finding Apple, Apple has taken steps to evade its update order, Gonzalez Rogers referred Apple and one of the executives to federal prosecutors for a possible investigation of criminal marriage.

“Apple has sought to maintain the flow of billions of dollars in revenue in the direct challenge of the films of this court,” and found that the internal records showed that “Apple knew exactly what it was doing,” and that a financing official had lied under the department.

Federal judges have the authority to claim an investigation agency such as the US Department of Justice to investigate whether companies and individuals should be tried criminally for violating court orders.

Gonzalez Rogers refused to say whether the government should bring a charge. This will be due to the United States’ lawyer, who oversees the federal prosecution teams in San Francisco and Oakland.

Criminal contempt for fines can be subject to fines, and individuals can face prison.