Apple Seeks to Halt Contempt Order as Legal Battle Over App Store Practices Intensifies

Apple is appealing to a higher court in an attempt to block a recent ruling by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who accused the tech giant of willfully violating a prior court injunction related to antitrust concerns. The ruling, which stems from Apple’s long-standing legal conflict with Epic Games, threatens to reshape the company’s control over its multibillion-dollar App Store ecosystem.

The latest development comes as Apple asked an appeals court to suspend enforcement of Judge Gonzalez Rogers’ finding of contempt. Apple claims the order unlawfully interferes with its rights to manage the App Store, arguing that the decision forces the company to relinquish core operational control and grant developers unrestricted access to proprietary tools and services.

“A federal court cannot force Apple to permanently give away free access to its products and services, including intellectual property,” Apple’s legal team asserted in its motion, describing the contempt ruling as “extraordinary” and legally unsound.

This latest dispute traces back to a 2020 lawsuit filed by Fortnite developer Epic Games, which accused Apple of operating an illegal monopoly through the App Store by collecting commissions of up to 30% on in-app purchases. Although the court dismissed the monopoly allegation, Judge Gonzalez Rogers did find Apple in violation of California’s competition laws for blocking developers from offering alternative payment options outside the App Store.

In 2021, the judge ordered Apple to permit developers to direct users to external payment platforms. However, Epic returned to court in 2023, accusing Apple of circumventing that ruling by imposing new developer fees effectively preserving its grip on in-app transactions.

Last week, Judge Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple had indeed defied the 2021 injunction. She cited internal Apple communications suggesting that executives including CEO Tim Cook were aware of and endorsed strategies that maintained anti-competitive structures. Notably, the judge accused Cook of ignoring internal advice to comply with the order, stating bluntly: “Cook chose poorly.”

In a sharply worded opinion, she stated, “Apple knew exactly what it was doing and at every turn chose the most anticompetitive option.” She further announced plans to refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California to determine whether criminal contempt proceedings should be initiated against the company.

Despite these setbacks, Apple maintains it is complying with the ruling while pursuing an appeal. The company also argues that the imposed restrictions could result in “substantial financial losses annually” and are based on conduct that has not been legally proven to be unlawful.

Epic Games, however, welcomed the court’s latest order, asserting that it is already producing consumer benefits. “Apple has faced a surge of genuine competition as developers have updated their apps with better payment methods, better deals, and better consumer choice,” the company stated on social media.

Epic also dismissed Apple’s appeal as “a last-ditch effort to block competition and extract massive junk fees at the expense of consumers and developers,” and affirmed its intent to return Fortnite to iOS devices.

As the legal showdown continues, the case may set a critical precedent for how tech giants manage their digital marketplaces and the extent to which courts can intervene in platform governance.