Apple(US:AAPL) 3 6 Ke·2025-05-08 12:36Core Viewpoint - The recent ruling by the Northern District Court of California against Apple in the Epic Games case marks a significant victory for developers, allowing them to direct users to external payment methods without incurring the "Apple tax" of 15-30% [2][13]. Group 1: Court Ruling and Implications - The court found that Apple "willfully violated" a 2021 injunction against anti-competitive pricing, requiring Apple to cease collecting a 27% commission on sales from outside the App Store [2][3]. - This ruling grants unprecedented freedom to developers, enabling them to guide users to external websites for transactions without the burden of the "Apple tax" [2][13]. - Apple's response included an update to its app review guidelines and a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court [2][3]. Group 2: Apple's Compliance and Internal Practices - The court criticized Apple's compliance program, labeling it as anti-competitive and a form of disguised monopoly [3][4]. - The 27% commission rate was deemed baseless, as it was derived from a 30% rate with a mere 3% discount, aimed at making alternative payment options economically unviable [4]. - Apple imposed various restrictions on developers, such as preventing external links from being displayed alongside in-app purchase options, which increased transaction friction [5][7]. Group 3: Legal Consequences for Apple - The court found clear evidence of Apple's contempt for the court's injunction, leading to potential civil and criminal repercussions for the company and its executives [8][12]. - Internal documents revealed that Apple executives discussed compliance strategies that would ensure external payment options remained uncompetitive, indicating malicious intent [9][10]. - The court's findings could lead to stricter penalties for Apple if it continues to interfere with competition and violate court orders [12]. Group 4: Global Impact on Developers - The ruling, while applicable to the U.S. App Store, could have far-reaching effects on the global digital market, particularly for developers in China who face the highest "Apple tax" rates [13][16]. - The case provides a strong precedent for Chinese developers to challenge the legitimacy of the "Apple tax" and advocate for reduced fees [16]. - The potential for a domino effect exists, where other regulatory bodies may reference this case to enhance antitrust scrutiny on Apple and similar platforms [16]. Group 5: Future of Digital Economy - The ruling is seen as a catalyst for innovation, allowing developers to regain control over payment processes and reinvest savings into their products and workforce [17][18]. - The shift from a monopolistic ecosystem to a more open platform could lead to new business models and marketing strategies within the digital economy [17][18]. - Ultimately, even Apple may benefit from this transition by improving product quality and fostering hardware innovation in response to increased competition [19].