"Apple believes no additional business changes should be required to take effect until all appeals in this case are resolved. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which could end up pausing the judge's order.įor its part, Apple doesn't believe it should have to alter its App Store policies while the case makes its way through the appellate court. The tech giant now has the option to appeal the case to the U.S. You asked for an across-the-board stay, which could take three, four, or five years.” 'It's harder to implement it and then take it back' “You didn't ask for a limited amount of time.
“You did not ask for a few months, you didn't ask for six months,” she told Apple's lawyer, Mark Perry. She also took issue with the potential that a hold on her order pending appellate review could take years. That conduct, she said, is fueled in part by the tech giant’s anti-steering rules that include “supracompetitive commission rates” that lead to extraordinarily high operating margins out of step with the value of its intellectual property. The judge wrote in an order that she had already detailed “incipient antitrust conduct” by Apple in her previous findings.
9 deadline for Apple to end its so-called anti-steering policy that has ensured larger developers have to pay the tech giant a 30% commission on App Store sales. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on Tuesday rejected Apple’s request to delay her previous injunction that sets a Dec. The loss means the company, for now, has just one more opportunity to put off allowing developers to offer alternate payment links within the App Store. Attorneys for Apple ( AAPL) on Tuesday again lost a bid before a California federal judge to hang on to control of its highly profitable App Store.
0 kommentar(er)
