![\"\"](\"\/\/www.iser-br.com\/Themes\/Release\/images\/responsive\/ettelecom-default.jpg\")
<\/strong>
SAN FRANCISCO: \"Fortnite<\/a>\" video game maker Epic Games<\/a> on Monday asked a three-judge federal appeals panel to overturn portions of a lower court antitrust ruling that largely favored Apple<\/a> Inc and its multibillion dollar App Store payment business.
Attorneys involved expect up to nine months before a ruling from the panel, which signaled some doubts about Epic's appeal but noted they would have to wade through contradictions within the lower court's reasoning.
Epic had sued Apple<\/a> in 2020 alleging that the iPhone<\/a> maker unlawfully requires software developers to pay it commissions of up to 30% on in-app purchases by consumers.
After a three-week trial last year, a judge stopped short of dubbing Apple an \"illegal monopolist\" and found that Epic had failed to prove that the privacy and security benefits of the commissions and related policies outweighed costs to consumers.
On Monday, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel quizzed attorneys from Epic, Apple and the U.S. Justice Department about whether the trial judge properly compared those consequences.
Epic acknowledged it had not brought sufficient evidence on some points. Apple reiterated that the commissions help it fund review of apps to ensure consumers are not exposed to fraudulent, pornographic or privacy-intrusive apps.
Judge Milan Smith told Epic's attorney Tom Goldstein near the end of the 1-hour, 15-minute hearing, \"The one thing that really troubles me is this failure of proof. Looking at the record, it seems (Apple's attorneys) have made a good case.\"
Smith and Goldstein then agreed that the lower court ruling ultimately delivered mixed messages on whether Apple's \"walled garden\" approach to managing the App Store was legally justified, which the Ninth Circuit must now sort.
\"It's hard to make it square,\" Smith said.
Key to the ruling was the lower court finding that Apple's contracts with developers did not violate antitrust laws because they were non-negotiable - developers either agreed or could not use the App Store. Epic argues that such standard agreements are still subject to scrutiny.
Other large technology companies deploy similar agreements, and the Justice Department joined the hearing because it said the lower court ruling could \"significantly harm antitrust enforcement beyond the specific context of this case.\"
The appeals panel also is reviewing the lower court's order that Apple let developers tell users how to make app purchases outside of its proprietary payment system.
<\/body>","next_sibling":[{"msid":95519377,"title":"Sweden drops investigation into suspected Ericsson bribery in China","entity_type":"ARTICLE","link":"\/news\/sweden-drops-investigation-into-suspected-ericsson-bribery-in-china\/95519377","category_name":null,"category_name_seo":"telecomnews"}],"related_content":[],"msid":95519418,"entity_type":"ARTICLE","title":"Epic's 'failure of proof' in Apple antitrust case questioned by appeals panel","synopsis":"After a three-week trial last year, a judge stopped short of dubbing Apple an \"illegal monopolist\" and found that Epic had failed to prove that the privacy and security benefits of the commissions and related policies outweighed costs to consumers.","titleseo":"telecomnews\/epics-failure-of-proof-in-apple-antitrust-case-questioned-by-appeals-panel","status":"ACTIVE","authors":[],"Alttitle":{"minfo":""},"artag":"Reuters","artdate":"2022-11-15 07:40:21","lastupd":"2022-11-15 07:43:17","breadcrumbTags":["Apple","Epic Apple case","Epic Games","Apple App Store","Fortnite","Fortnite game","iPhone","iPhone app store"],"secinfo":{"seolocation":"telecomnews\/epics-failure-of-proof-in-apple-antitrust-case-questioned-by-appeals-panel"}}" data-authors="[" "]" data-category-name="" data-category_id="" data-date="2022-11-15" data-index="article_1">
- Telecom乐动扑克News
- 2分钟阅读
史诗的失败证明苹果的反垄断案件上诉委员会的讯问
去年后三周的审判,法官没有配音苹果“非法垄断”,发现史诗未能证明佣金和相关的隐私和安全效益政策带来的成本转嫁给消费者。
旧金山:“Fortnite“视频游戏制造商史诗般的游戏周一问一个由三名法官组成的联邦上诉委员会推翻下级法院的一部分反垄断裁决主要青睐苹果公司和其数十亿美元的应用商店支付业务。
律师参与期望在裁决前九个月的面板,这暗示一些疑虑史诗的吸引力但指出他们将不得不涉水矛盾在下级法院的推理。
史诗起诉苹果2020年,声称iPhone制造商非法要求软件开发者支付高达30%的佣金在应用内购买的消费者。
去年后三周的审判,法官没有配音苹果“非法垄断”,发现史诗未能证明佣金和相关的隐私和安全效益政策带来的成本转嫁给消费者。
周一,美国第九巡回上诉法院小组询问律师从史诗,苹果和美国司法部关于审判法官是否正确而这些后果。
史诗承认它并没有带来足够的证据在一些问题上。苹果公司重申,佣金有助于基金评审的应用程序,以确保消费者不暴露欺诈,色情或privacy-intrusive应用程序。
法官米兰史密斯告诉史诗的律师汤姆·戈尔茨坦附近的小时15分钟的听证会上,“这是很麻烦的一件事我失败的证明。观察记录,(苹果的律师)似乎已经有了一个好案例。”
史密斯和戈尔茨坦然后同意下级法院的裁决最终传递含混不清的信息是否苹果的“围墙花园”的方法来管理应用程序商店是合法合理的,第九巡回法院必须现在。
“很难让它广场,”史密斯说。
关键是下级法院裁决与开发者发现苹果公司的合同没有违反反托拉斯法,因为他们没有商量余地的,开发商同意或无法使用App Store。史诗辩称,这种标准协议仍受到审查。
其他大型科技公司部署类似协议和司法部加入了听力,因为它说,下级法院的裁决可能“严重伤害反垄断执法的特定上下文之外。”
上诉委员会也正在审查下级法院的苹果让开发人员告诉用户如何使应用程序购买其专有以外的支付系统。
评论
现在评论 阅读评论(1)所有评论
找到这个评论进攻?
下面选择你的理由并单击submit按钮。这将提醒我们的版主采取行动