Apple asks Federal judge to halt enforcement of App Store enforcement order

On Friday, Apple AAPL 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 Epic Games will likely have its request granted at some point as it continues to battle with Apple over the app store policies.

If a betting person was to be a betting person, I would say that they ll get a temporary stay, Sam Weinstein, cardozo School of Law professor and former lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice's Antitrust Division, told Yahoo Finance, speculating that Apple would win a temporary stay rather than the permanent one it sought.

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

The request comes after Epic Games issued a mixed ruling last month in a widely seen legal dispute between Apple and Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The video game maker filed a claim against Apple after it was removed from the App Store last year for using the Tech giant's 30% commission to create an in-app payment system.

While the judge ruled Epic did not show that Apple had failure to prove she was an illegal monopolist, she found the tech giant violated California's unfair competition law. She ordered Apple to change its App Store policies to allow developers to direct customers to alternative purchasing methods, including in-app purchases — likely reducing Apple's commissions.

For Epic's part, it was ordered by the judge to pay Apple's 30% fee on roughly $12 million of revenue that it earned from its popular game Fortnite between August 2020 and October 2020 when the game maker sidestepped Apple's anti-steering policy by offering payment outside of the App Store.

Experts told Yahoo Finance the appeal process might drag out for at least a year.

On Dec 9, Apple must stop holding Epic Games in line with the District Court Appeals process and requiring it to warn app developers about alternative buying options for users. Apple must also allow developers to communicate with customers who voluntarily share their contact information.

While the judge's decision in the case favored Apple, the ruling has fueled speculation that, if enforced, it could cause substantial financial repercussions for the company. Apple, which does not make specific App Store revenue statement, said it made $53.8 billion of net services sales in fiscal year 2020. Apple would be irreparably harmed in the absence of a stay, Epic argued in its Friday motion which asks to table its enforcement pending the resolution of appeals from both Apple and Epic. Epic has waited for months to conclude that major harm is already insuring under the injunction because iOS developers have misinterpreted it.

Erica M. Douglas, an assistant law professor from Temple University's Beasley School of Law, told Yahoo Finance that one of Apple's strongest arguments is that it would suffer harm if the stay was denied. However, Douglas suspects Apple's request is less likely to be accepted by the District Court judge who put it in place.

It makes sense if you step back and look at the legal perspective in that if Apple has to change all its rules and allow these apps into the ecosystem, that's going to change their whole business, said Douglas. Is Epic banned from the App Store?

Anat Alon-Beck was surprised when Case Western Reserve University assistant business professor Anat Alon-Beck agreed that the ramifications of the judge or judges' decisions on the injunction could be significant. What the court is asking Apple to do is change their business model, Alon-Beck said.

If the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handles the injunction request, Weinstein said, it will offer Apple and Epic clues about its eventual ruling in the broader case.

The 9th Circuit is going to have to tell you something about what they think the merits are, both for the underlying liability determination and for the injunction, Weinstein said of the possible scenario.

Alexis Follow aleksiskweed on Twitter.

For information on using stocks, check out Cashay and watch videos like these.