US Appeals Court upholds contempt ruling against Apple, but allows commissions on external payments

A US federal appeals court has upheld a ruling finding Apple in civil contempt for willfully defying a court order meant to open its App Store to competing in-app payment systems, but also partially eased restrictions by allowing the company to collect commissions on those external payments.

Centre seeks answers from Apple after new wave of spyware alerts hits Indian users

In a unanimous decision, according to an AP report, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals largely endorsed the blistering contempt order issued in April by US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The judge had ruled that Apple violated a central part of her 2021 judgment in the antitrust case brought by Epic Games, which accused the tech giant of maintaining an illegal monopoly through its tightly controlled App Store ecosystem.

However, the Ninth Circuit overturned one critical element of the contempt ruling: a ban that prevented Apple from charging any fees on purchases made through payment methods outside its control. The appeals court said that prohibition was overly broad, directing Judge Gonzalez Rogers to reopen the matter and determine what a “fair” commission rate should be. The judges offered broad principles for how such a rate could be set but did not propose a specific percentage.

The appeals panel nonetheless agreed with the lower court that Apple had effectively defied efforts to foster genuine payment competition. Epic’s 2020 lawsuit challenged Apple’s “walled garden” model, which forced all in-app payments through its own system and allowed it to levy commissions of 15–30%, a lucrative revenue stream in a services business generating more than USD 100 billion annually.

Although Gonzalez Rogers did not find Apple to be an illegal monopolist in her 2021 ruling, she mandated that the company allow developers to display links to alternative payment options. After failing in multiple appeals, including at the US Supreme Court, Apple introduced commissions of 12–27% on external payment methods — rates so steep that most developers avoided offering alternatives.

Apple scales up iPhone production in India for US-bound models

Epic argued this move was a deliberate attempt to sidestep the court’s mandate, a position the judge ultimately agreed with, calling Apple’s compliance efforts a “sham.” The Ninth Circuit’s latest decision keeps that finding intact, while reopening debate over how much Apple can legally charge developers using non-Apple payment systems.