Odds are Apple will win a temporary stay in Epic ruling

From Alexis Keenan’s “Apple’s App Store feud with Epic Games is far from over” posted Tuesday on Yahoo!Finance:

Apple (AAPL) on Friday asked a federal judge to hold off on enforcing an order that would force it to change some of its App Store policies while the tech giant appeals the ruling. Experts say Apple will likely have its request granted at some point as it continues to fight Epic Games over its App Store policies.

“If I were a betting person I would say that they’ll get a temporary stay,” Sam Weinstein, Cardozo School of Law professor and former attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice’s antitrust division, told Yahoo Finance, speculating that Apple would win a provisional stay rather than the permanent one it sought.

In deciding Apple’s motion, the judge has several options, according to Weinstein. She could clarify the intent of the order and keep it in place; offer a permanent injunction pending the outcome of the appeal; or issue a temporary injunction and let the appeals court, where both Apple and Epic have filed appeals, decide on the matter.

My take: Kicking the can down the road is a well-trodden judicial path.

See also: Apple wants out of the only part of Epic it lost


  1. Jerry Doyle said:
    After receiving a promotion early in my vocational career where I would be making decisions on key issues affecting the administration of programs in a five-state geographic region, a mentor gave me key advice to employ. He told me that if I let those issues sit on my desk long enough that many would resolve themselves. He was correct.

    Apple should exercise all avenues to protect its business model if it believes such measures retain the continuity of service, security and integrity of the iOS eco-system for its users. I would expect no less from Apple. By the time this judicial process is completed, a judicial response may no longer be needed.

    Tim Sweeney must be going “ballistic!”

    October 13, 2021
  2. David Emery said:
    IANAL, but I think the big legal principle in the Apple stay has to do with the absence of demonstrated harm that the judge’s ruling addresses. Thus I suspect that Apple wants to be sure to not set a precedent that a judge can order a remedy to a harm that the plaintiff has not identified and argued. That’s really fodder for the appeal, but I can certainly see why Apple would ask for a stay pending appeal. The ‘Irreparable harm’ is the change to the business model.

    October 13, 2021
  3. Michael Goldfeder said:
    The interesting issue in the ruling by the Federal Judge was enforcing a nation wide court order based solely on California law. I don’t see that ruling passing constitutional muster.

    The California anticompetitive law she found was violated is only applicable to the state. Will all developers electronically set up their App shops in California to take advantage that ruling? That will bring in lots of sales tax revenue for California.

    That portion of the order was very strange.

    October 13, 2021
  4. Kirk DeBernardi said:
    The longer Tim Sweeney stews in the legal pot of his own creation, the better.

    Serves as a good example to others.

    October 13, 2021
    • Bart Yee said:
      You know, Sweeney, if you want all the revenue from your games, it’s easy to create your own hardware system. You could hire a bunch of guys away from Xbox and Sony to make your own console, give that about 2-3 years and maybe $200-500M R&D plus another $500M min for limited production. You can decide to price it to make money or a loss leader. Then you can have you own (exclusive?) App Store and reap (rape?) all the % profits from developers you want. Oh I’m also sure you’d give some favored treatment to games and developers who used your Unreal engine.

      Or, like Samsung, you could engage any number of Chinese original device makers (ODMs) to build you a decent large screen smartphone with sufficient power to run games “well” and voila!, you’ve got your own mobile game platform. Sure, it’ll cost about $500M for initial R&D and likely $500M-$1B to guarantee a startup production run of say 2M devices but hey, you’ve got Tencent backing you and I’m sure they can get you some discounts.

      We can’t wait to see how well your security and app vetting (if you have any) goes for your fledgling mobile hardware platform. Oh, yeah, I guess it’ll have to run on Android too. Good luck with that “paying” demographic.

      October 13, 2021

Leave a Reply