The Case
Epic Games, maker of Fortnite, sued Apple in 2020, arguing that Apple’s tight control of the iPhone — forcing all apps through the App Store and all in-app purchases through Apple’s payment system, which takes up to a 30% commission — was an illegal monopoly. It became the defining challenge to Apple’s “walled garden.” The result was mixed: in 2021 the trial judge rejected Epic’s broad federal antitrust claim, finding Apple was not an unlawful monopolist, but ruled against Apple under California’s unfair-competition law on its “anti-steering” rules — the policies that barred developers from even telling users about cheaper ways to pay outside the app.
So Apple mostly won on monopoly but lost on the narrow, practical question of whether it could gag developers about alternatives.
What the Courts Forced
The Supreme Court declined to hear further appeals in early 2024, locking in the anti-steering injunction. When Apple complied only grudgingly — letting developers add a link out but still charging a commission on those outside purchases — the trial judge in 2025 found Apple had willfully violated the order and even referred the matter for possible criminal-contempt investigation. A federal appeals court then affirmed that developers must be free to include “buttons, links or other calls to action” steering customers to buy outside the app, without Apple’s interference.
The upshot: developers can now direct iPhone users to the web to pay, potentially at lower prices, a real crack in the walled garden.
What It Means
This is an antitrust and enforcement fight, not a consumer refund case — there is no payout for App Store shoppers to claim. Its practical effect reaches users indirectly: as developers steer buyers to the web, some subscriptions and in-app purchases may get cheaper, and the change feeds into a broader global push — including new laws abroad — to open up app stores.
Before You Act
Thinking About Filing a Claim?
Most plaintiff lawyers offer a free initial consultation and work on contingency, meaning no fee unless there is a recovery. LawsuitWatch is not a law firm: we publish explainers, and we do not provide legal advice, representation or referrals. Your state bar directory is the reliable place to find and verify a lawyer.
Apple App Store Antitrust Lawsuit: The Epic Games Fight: Frequently Asked Questions
Answers to the most common questions about this case and your legal options.
Who won the Epic v. Apple case?
It was mixed. Apple largely won — the court rejected Epic's broad antitrust monopoly claim — but Apple lost on 'anti-steering' under California law, and must let developers tell users about cheaper payment options outside the app.
What did the courts force Apple to do?
After the Supreme Court declined further appeals in 2024, Apple had to allow steering to outside payment. When it complied only grudgingly, a judge found willful violation in 2025, and an appeals court affirmed developers may link users out to buy on the web.
Do App Store customers get money?
No. This is an antitrust and enforcement fight, not a consumer refund case. The benefit is indirect — developers steering buyers to the web may lower some prices.
Legal Disclaimer
This article is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Case status, eligibility criteria, and any amounts described are as reported at the date shown and may change. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction about your own situation.