As the saying goes, justice delayed is justice denied. Or perhaps more accurately, a bad apple spoils the bunch. 

On April 30, 2025, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued a blistering 80-page order against Apple, finding the tech giant to have “willfully violated” the Court's prior 2021 Injunction. In short, this most recent Order (effective immediately) stops Apple from collecting its 27% fee on purchases made outside of app environments and allows developers significant freedom in communicating with consumers about external webstores. 

Let's start with the important parts - what are the practical implication of this ruling. Then, if you're still interested, we'll dive into what happened and why.

Key Takeaways: Updated Apple App Review Guidelines

In light of the ruling, Apple has since announced that it has updated its App Review Guidelines as follows (emphasis added):

So, What Does This mean?

Developers with apps on the United States storefront (for its U.S.-based consumers) can now:

• Provide external links, buttons, and any other encouragement for users to leave the app environment to make purchases through webstores.
• Display transparent pricing, including telling users that they could pay less through a developer's webstore.
• Using dynamic links, such as bringing users to webstores with pre-populated information/account details for users to complete purchases.
• And perhaps most importantly – stop paying Apple 27% on any external purchases made outside of the app environment.

Spotify was seemingly the earliest adopter, announcing on May 1, 2025, the changes it is rolling out in its latest app update. 

“After nearly a decade, this will finally allow us to freely show clear pricing information and links to purchase, fostering transparency and choice for U.S. consumers. We can now give consumers lower prices, more control, and easier access to the Spotify experience,” Spotify wrote in its announcement. 

So, What Happened?

I've been very closely following this case for almost five years now. 

For anyone unfamiliar with Apple's practices, the Apple App Store is the only way for iOS users in the U.S. to download third-party apps to their iPhones and iPads. Apple previously required that all in-app digital purchases must go through Apple's internal payment processing mechanism, In-App Purchase ("IAP"). For purchases of digital goods made through Apple's IAP, Apple implemented a 30% fee on developers. 

In August 2020, Epic Games filed a complaint against Apple (as well as Google) for its anticompetitive conduct. After a full trial of the case, the Northern District of California issued an injunction against Apple in September 2021. The 2021 Injunction laid out the Court's findings with respect to Apple's unfair practices (its 30% commission was found to be anticompetitive) and the resulting enjoined conduct (prohibiting Apple from denying developers transparency with their users regarding pricing). After failed appeals, the 2021 Injunction went into effect on January  17, 2024. 

“Apple's response to this Injunction  strains credulity,” Judge Gonzalez Rogers remarked in the April 30th Order. The Court goes on, “This is an injunction, not a negotiation. There are no do-overs once a party willfully disregards a court order.”

Apple's compliance with the 2021 Injunction went something like this:

• New policy (the “External Link Account” entitlement program) charging developers a 27% fee on external purchases, instead of the 30% IAP fee;
• Heavily restricting when and how developers communicated with users regarding external purchase options;
• Creating a so-called “scare screen” to dissuade users from continuing with external purchases; and
• Excluding developer participation in other discounted commission programs (i.e., a reduced 15% fee for certain subscription video and news apps).

Why Does it Matter?

In this latest Order, the Court lays out overwhelming evidence as to Apple's willful violation of the 2021 Injunction through its External Link Account program. As a result of this violation, the Court concluded definitively that Apple “chose to defy” the Court's prior order through these “new anticompetitive barriers.” 

As such, the Court permanently and immediately prohibits Apple from:

• Imposing the 27% commission on purchases users make outside of an app, and as such, Apple cannot track or monitor external purchases; 
• Restricting developers’ style, language, formatting, quantity, flow or placement of links for purchases outside of the app;
• Prohibiting the use of buttons, links, and other calls to action for users to make purchases outside of the app;
• Excluding certain categories of apps from obtaining link access;
• Interfering with a consumer’s choice to proceed in or out of an app environment with anything other than a neutral message* 
  • *Note: The court stated that Apple’s current message that states: “Open in Safari? You will leave the app and go to the developer’s website,” with a Cancel/Open option for users is pre-authorized as sufficiently neutral.
• Restricting a developer from taking users to a pre-logged in page, including passing on product details from the app, user details, or other details needed for a user that intends to make a purchase.

This is an important and significant victory for iOS app developers and consumers alike. This ruling will allow developers meaningful freedom to direct users to alternative methods of payment outside of the app environment, without any forced “commissions.”

“For this Court, there is no second bite at the apple,” concluded Judge Gonzalez Rogers.