Federal Judge Hits Apple Exec With Criminal Referral Over ‘Obvious Lies’

Five years ago, Epic Games, the shaper of Fortnite, filed an antitrust suit against Apple for its in-app acquisition policies. Since then, things mostly haven’t worked retired successful Epic’s favor. But this week, a national justice rebuked Apple for “willfully violating” an earlier injunction. Coupled with claims that a apical Apple enforcement lied nether oath and a referral for transgression contempt, Epic whitethorn person secured a large triumph for developers.

Epic’s suit stems from its intentionally violating App Store policies by offering mobile users a nonstop outgo enactment for in-game purchases. This circumvented Apple’s 30% committee connected in-App Store purchases. In response, Apple (and Google, who Epic besides sued) removed Fortnite from mobile stores. And thus, Epic formally launched Project Liberty to dismantle Apple’s monopoly connected mobile gaming.

But successful 2021, United States District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Roger mostly ruled successful Apple’s favour and adjacent ordered Epic to wage Apple mislaid revenue. However, she did regularisation that Apple needed to fto developers usage and notify radical in-app of alternate outgo options. That is astatine the halfway of Gonzalez Rogers’ Wednesday ruling coming down connected Apple’s “willful violation” of tribunal orders.

According to Gonzalez Rogers, Apple “continued its anticompetitive conduct” aft it couldn’t get the Supreme Court to onslaught down her injunction. Chief amongst complaints is that Apple imposed a caller 27% interest connected developers for purchases extracurricular of the App Store. That’s alongside its pre-existing 30% committee for in-App Store purchases.

“Apple sought to support a gross watercourse worthy billions successful nonstop defiance of this court’s injunction,” Gonzalez Rogers wrote. She besides stated that Apple “knew precisely what it was doing and astatine each crook chose the astir anticompetitive option.” (Emphasis her own.)

Online, Epic’s Chief Executive Tim Sweeney celebrated the win, tweeting, “Apple’s 15030% junk fees are present conscionable arsenic dormant present successful [the US] arsenic they are successful Europe…Unlawful here, unlawful there.”

NO FEES connected web transactions. Game implicit for the Apple Tax.

Apple’s 15-30% junk fees are present conscionable arsenic dormant present successful the United States of America arsenic they are successful Europe nether the Digital Markets Act. Unlawful here, unlawful there.

4 years 4 months 17 days. https://t.co/RucrsX7Z4A pic.twitter.com/3kSYnt5pcI

— Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) April 30, 2025

In summation to its caller commission, Apple tried to dissuade customers from utilizing alternate outgo methods astatine all. Per the New York Times, CEO Tim Cook requested that customers person a “scare” surface saying “Apple’s privateness and information standards bash not use to purchases made connected the web.” While executive Phillip Schiller tried to get Apple to comply with the court, Tim Cook ignored his advice. Gonzalez Rogers wrote, “Cook chose poorly.”

Gonzalez Rogers besides stated that Apple’s vice president of finance, Alex Roman, “outright lied” astatine a May 2024 hearing. During it, Apple tried to “mislead the Court” regarding its determination to present a caller commission. When asked, Roman testified that Apple hadn’t decided the interest until January 16, 2024, but documents amusement that it was decided successful July 2023.

“Neither Apple, nor its counsel, corrected the, now, evident lies,” Gonzalez Rogers wrote. “They did not question to retreat the grounds oregon person it stricken.” She has referred the substance to U.S. District Attorneys to find if some Roman and Apple should look transgression proceedings.

On X, Sweeney extended Apple a bid proposal. He wrote, “If Apple extends the court’s friction-free, Apple-tax-free model worldwide, we’ll instrumentality Fortnite to the App Store worldwide and driblet existent and aboriginal litigation connected the topic.”

Apple did not respond to Gizmodo’s petition for comment. It has not issued an authoritative connection regarding the adjacent steps. However, Gonzalez made it wide that this is “not a negotiation.”

“There are nary do-overs erstwhile a enactment willfully disregards a tribunal order,” she wrote. “Time is of the essence. The Court volition not tolerate further delays.”