On Oct. 21, the Epic Games vs Apple appeal will be held, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been given permission to present oral arguments in Epic Games's side.
DOJ to Argue in Epic Games's Side
In the upcoming appeal, DOJ antitrust lawyers have requested 10 minutes of oral argument time and are likely to restate previous assertions that Apple's victory might harm antitrust enforcement.
The DOJ technically isn't representing either side in this lawsuit. However, as per 9to5Mac and Appleinsider, the agency wants to specifically reassert its earlier written brief, which contends that the court erred by deciding mostly in Apple's favor.
The DoJ was concerned about a number of things, including how the lower court interpreted the market and Apple's monopoly power over pricing, according to a news story by TechCrunch.
The new filing stated that according to an amicus brief filed on Jan. 27, the district court's analysis of the Sherman Act contained many legal errors, and these flaws might "imperil effective antitrust enforcement, especially in the digital economy."
There will be relatively little time allotted for each party to make their own oral arguments. It should be noted that only 20 minutes will be given to Apple and Epic for their respective oral arguments.
Apple has requested that the 10 minutes be subtracted from the time allowed to Epic's lawyers because the DOJ is essentially supporting that side of the appeal.
Separately, the State of California also requested time to present arguments in court in order to express its opinions on how the court should assess its consumer protection law, known as California's Unfair Competition Law.
According to documents submitted to the courts late on Friday, DOJ's and the State of California's requests were approved.
Background on Epic Games vs Apple Antitrust Lawsuit
As previously reported, Epic Games sued Apple in 2020 for prohibiting it from using its own payment system for its game, Fortnite. It should be noted that in-app purchases for the game should be made through the App Store, where Apple takes a 30% cut.
However, the court found that Apple does not meet the criteria needed to be called a monopoly as it concluded that Epic's claims that Apple is a monopolist are baseless.
Meanwhile, a permanent injunction issued by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the Apple vs Epic Games lawsuit last year forbids Apple from preventing developers from directing users to third-party payment options.
Therefore, the court said that Apple must allow links to third-party payment methods for all application developers.
However, because they disagreed with the court's decision, both parties appealed the judgment.
When the anti-steering issue was taken into consideration, Apple claims the judge committed "legal error."
Epic, on the other hand, is appealing the ruling that the iPhone maker is not a monopoly on the grounds that there is no other way for developers to sell iPhone apps than its App Store.
The appeal hearing has been scheduled for Oct. 21.
Related Article : Epic Games vs Apple Antitrust Lawsuit Is Scheduled For October
