news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

it house reported on september 29 that apple failed to persuade the judge to extend the deadline for submitting relevant documents in its legal dispute with epic games. in its request to the court on september 26, apple claimed that it needed more time to complete production of the documents because the number of documents that needed to be reviewed exceeded previous estimates.

district judge thomas s. hixson denied apple's request and gave it until september 30 to submit 1.3 million documents related to its january changes to app store policies. the judge found that apple had never mentioned in previous status reports that the number of files that needed to be reviewed was significantly higher than previous estimates, so apple's claim that it only learned this information in the last two weeks was not credible.

judge hixson emphasized that apple must comply with the original deadline and pointed out that apple's delay may have a negative impact on the progress of the case. he thinks,apple has the ability to complete its review of the documents over the weekend, and it is speculated that apple's delay is to avoid the exposure of adverse information.

according to it house’s understanding, this legal dispute began in 2020, when epic games bypassed the app store’s rules and directly provided a payment link, causing apple to remove it from the app store. since then, the two sides have been locked in a legal dispute.

under pressure from the european union, apple has revised its app store rules to allow developers to offer third-party payment options in the eu version of the app store. epic games has also opened its own eu store.

however, epic games continues to pursue the matter, arguing that apple has not fully complied with judge yvonne gonzalez rogers' ruling in the united states and other countries. in rejecting apple's request, judge hixson believed that apple had the ability to complete the review of documents within the stipulated time, and speculated that apple's delay was to avoid the exposure of adverse information.