Court Sides with Apple in Apple v. Epic Case
Ruling affirms ability of marketplace owners to set marketplace rules
Sep 10, 2021

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers announced a decision in the antitrust lawsuit between Epic Games and Apple Inc., ruling that Apple’s 30 percent commission cap and app developer restrictions are not a violation of antitrust law. The judge’s decision reaffirmed the principle that marketplace owners are allowed to set their own marketplace terms, while directing Apple to end its “anti-steering” restrictions.

“Antitrust law should focus on protecting consumers, but this case has always been about Epic Games trying to save a few million dollars. The judge’s rejection of most of Epic’s arguments should give policymakers pause in legislating to help some companies’ bottom line,” said Chamber of Progress CEO Adam Kovacevich.

Kovacevich also noted that the ruling affirmed marketplaces’ ability to set their own rules. “So many tech policy and legal disputes revolve around whether a platform can set their own rules to serve consumers, even when that upsets suppliers. The judge clearly backed platforms, and that will impact the other big pending lawsuits against major tech platforms.”

In her full decision, Judge Gonzalez-Rogers determined that Apple does not have a monopoly in the market of digital mobile gaming transactions, saying that “the court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws,” and that, “ultimately, Epic Games overreached.”

# # #

Chamber of Progress ( is a new center-left tech industry policy coalition promoting technology’s progressive future. We work to ensure that all Americans benefit from technological leaps, and that the tech industry operates responsibly and fairly.

Our corporate partners do not have a vote on or veto over our positions. We do not speak for individual partner companies and remain true to our stated principles even when our partners disagree.