Apple on Wednesday filed an emergency motion asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to put on hold key portions of a recent ruling that makes drastic changes to how the company’s App Store operates.
In court documents filed on Wednesday, Apple said the district court’s order was “extraordinary,” arguing that the order unlawfully forces the company to permanently give up control over “core aspects of its business operations.”
“A federal court cannot force Apple to permanently give away free access to its products and services, including intellectual property,” Apple’s lawyers wrote in the motion.
Apple is seeking to put a halt to two major provisions of the order while it appeals. This includes the ban on charging any commisisons for purchases made via external links, as well as rrstrictions affecting Apple’s ability to set conditions on how purchase links appear in iPhone apps.
The emergency filing follows last week’s ruling by US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers that Apple had violated a court order to better promote competition by opening up its App Store to outside payment options.
The judge sided with Epic Games, publisher of Fortnite, who alleged that Apple failed to comply with a 2021 court order issued by Gonzalez Rogers, finding that the Cupertino firm had engaged in anticompetitive conduct in violation of California law.
Gonzalez Rogers has ordered Apple to make changes to its App Store, including banning Apple from charging commisisons on purchases made outside of the store.
The judge also instructed federal prosecutors to investigate whether Apple is in criminal contempt of court for violating her 2021 ruling.
The judge found that Apple “willfully” violated her injunction.
While Apple complied with her ruling, it is now seeking relief from what the company calls “punitive” measures that would cost it “hundreds of millions to billions” of dollars annually. The company is asking the appeals court to issue a ruling by May 28.
“These new rules are not temporary sanctions for non-compliance that Apple can purge,” the filing states. “Instead, the district court took the highly irregular step of imposing new, different, and permanent restrictions.”
The heart of the legal conflict revolves around how Apple implemented the changes ordered in the original 2021 injunction. Apple created a new system that, while allowing developers to link to external payment options, still imposed a 12-27% commisison on purchaes made via those links, while also restricting where links could appear.
Epic Games, of course, had something to say about Apple’s emergency motion calling it “a last ditch effort to block competition and extract massive junk fees at the expense of consumers and developers.”
