Apple Claims Epic Games Seeks Unfair Advantage
In an ongoing legal dispute, Apple has leveled accusations against Epic Games. The company claims that Epic is attempting to gain an unfair advantage on its platform. This confrontation is part of a broader legal battle taking place in various countries, including Australia.
Background of the Case
The conflict between Apple and Epic Games dates back to 2020 when Epic initiated legal action in Australia. Epic accused Apple of violating competition laws, leading to significant legal scrutiny of Apple’s practices.
Recent Developments
In August 2025, Australia’s federal court partially ruled in favor of Epic Games. The court found that Apple’s rules against sideloading and alternative payment methods breached the Competition and Consumer Act. However, the court did not determine how to address Apple’s alleged anti-competitive behavior.
- Epic Games seeks permission for sideloading on iPhones without fees to Apple.
- Apple contends that these demands exceed the court’s prior ruling.
- Apple maintains that its policies are essential for user and developer security.
Court Proceedings and Future Hearings
A case management hearing took place on October 17. Both parties presented their arguments regarding the proposed remedies from Epic Games. An initial remedies hearing is scheduled for December, while a comprehensive relief hearing has been postponed until March 2026.
In its arguments, Epic Games has suggested measures for the court’s consideration. Apple is reviewing these proposals, concerned about potential implications for privacy and security.
Potential Outcomes
The initial ruling indicates that Apple might need to permit sideloading and alternative payment methods in Australia. This outcome could mirror the changes prompted by the European Union’s Digital Markets Act.
Epic Games has expressed optimism, suggesting that Fortnite may soon return to iOS in Australia due to the court’s decision.
As this legal saga unfolds, both companies prepare for the implications of the court’s decisions. The ongoing conflict highlights the complicated relationship between app developers and platform holders in the digital marketplace.
