Mashable 05月01日 18:14
Apple held in contempt for violating court order in Epic Games antitrust case
index_new5.html
../../../zaker_core/zaker_tpl_static/wap/tpl_guoji1.html

 

美国法院裁定苹果公司故意违反了禁止其反竞争行为的法院命令,面临民事藐视法庭指控。此前,苹果公司被指控通过设置障碍来阻止App开发者引导用户使用替代支付方式,并收取27%的佣金。法官Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers认为,苹果的行为旨在维持其收入来源,并对苹果高管的证词提出了质疑,认为其包含误导和谎言。苹果公司表示强烈反对这一裁决,并计划上诉。Epic Games则对此表示欢迎,计划下周将Fortnite重新带回美国iOS平台。

🍎 法院裁定苹果公司故意违反了2021年的禁令,该禁令源于Epic Games提起的反垄断诉讼,Epic Games认为iOS应用程序应允许提供Apple Pay以外的应用程序内支付处理方法。

💰 苹果公司被指控在2021年裁决后开始对应用外购买收取27%的佣金,并试图通过“恐吓”屏幕、静态URL和通用声明等方式阻止用户使用替代支付方式。

🤥 法官Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers点名批评了苹果高管,认为财务副总裁Alex Roman的证词“充满了误导和谎言”。内部文件显示,尽管Phillip Schiller曾建议苹果遵守禁令,但CEO Tim Cook选择了首席财务官Luca Maestri的建议,采取了“有利可图”的策略。

⚖️ 法院将苹果公司和Alex Roman移交给美国检察官,以调查刑事藐视法庭。苹果公司必须停止其规避禁令的行为。苹果公司表示强烈反对这一裁决,并计划上诉。Epic Games计划将Fortnite重新带回美国iOS平台。

A U.S. judge has found Apple intentionally violated a court order prohibiting it from anti-competitive conduct. Held in civil contempt of court, the tech giant is also facing an investigation for criminal contempt, with one of its executives even accused of "outright [lying] under oath."

On Wednesday, California District Court judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued a scathing order calling out Apple for "willful violation" of a 2021 injunction. This injunction had been issued as part of Epic Games' ongoing antitrust lawsuit against Apple, in which the Fortnite developer argued that iOS apps should be allowed to offer in-app payment processing methods other than Apple Pay.

At the time, the court ordered that Apple could not prevent app developers from directing users to alternate payment options. It also found that the 30 percent commission Apple had been charging on in-app purchases was anti-competitive, and thus would no longer be allowed.

However, Apple allegedly implemented some workarounds, according to Wednesday's court order. Gonzalez Rogers said that after the 2021 ruling, Apple began to charge a 27 percent commission on off-app purchases — a fee which hadn't previously existed. The order further stated that Apple had attempted to steer customers away from alternate, non-Apple payment methods with barriers such as "full page 'scare' screens, static URLs, and generic statements."

"Apple, despite knowing its obligations thereunder, thwarted the Injunction’s goals, and continued its anticompetitive conduct solely to maintain its revenue stream," wrote Gonzalez Rogers.

"This is an injunction, not a negotiation. There are no do-overs once a party willfully disregards a court order."

"Cook chose poorly."
- Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers

Gonzalez Rogers also called out specific Apple executives, writing that vice-president of finance Alex Roman attempted to mislead the court by providing testimony "replete with misdirection and outright lies." Noting that neither Apple nor its lawyers corrected Roman's testimony, the judge ruled that "Apple will be held to have adopted the lies and misrepresentations to this Court."

Not all Apple's executives are accused of having attempted to skirt the law, with internal documents cited in the order revealing that executive Phillip Schiller argued Apple should comply with the injunction. Unfortunately, they also showed that CEO Tim Cook allegedly chose to follow the "lucrative approach" advice of Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri instead, which was "advocating for a commission."

"In stark contrast to Apple’s initial in-court testimony, contemporaneous business documents reveal that Apple knew exactly what it was doing and at every turn chose the most anticompetitive option," Gonzalez Rogers wrote. "Internally, Phillip Schiller had advocated that Apple comply with the Injunction, but Tim Cook ignored Schiller and instead allowed Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri and his finance team to convince him otherwise.

"Cook chose poorly."


Featured Video For You
This deep sea robot just dove down Earth's deepest trench

Apple is now facing the consequences of that decision, with the court referring both the company and Roman specifically to the U.S. Attorney for investigation of criminal contempt. The company must also cease its alleged injunction workarounds.

"Apple willfully chose not to comply with this Court’s Injunction," wrote Gonzalez Rogers (emphasis original). "It did so with the express intent to create new anticompetitive barriers which would, by design and in effect, maintain a valued revenue stream; a revenue stream previously found to be anticompetitive.

"That it thought this Court would tolerate such insubordination was a gross miscalculation. As always, the cover-up made it worse. For this Court, there is no second bite at the apple."

In a statement, Apple said that it "strongly disagree[s]" with the court's decision, and intends to appeal.

Of course, Epic Games is much more pleased with the outcome. In the wake of Wednesday's order, CEO Tim Sweeney announced that it now plans to bring Fortnite back to iOS in the U.S. next week. Apple removed Fortnite from its app store back in 2020, though last year it made a return for players in the EU.

"Epic puts forth a peace proposal: If Apple extends the court's friction-free, Apple-tax-free framework worldwide, we'll return Fortnite to the App Store worldwide and drop current and future litigation on the topic," Sweeney posted to X.

Fish AI Reader

Fish AI Reader

AI辅助创作,多种专业模板,深度分析,高质量内容生成。从观点提取到深度思考,FishAI为您提供全方位的创作支持。新版本引入自定义参数,让您的创作更加个性化和精准。

FishAI

FishAI

鱼阅,AI 时代的下一个智能信息助手,助你摆脱信息焦虑

联系邮箱 441953276@qq.com

相关标签

苹果 反垄断 法院裁决
相关文章