Contradictions

„we had no choice but to remove the Fortnite app from our App Store"

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store, contradicting the claim that Apple continued to offer Epic access through the iOS app.

„The August 14 notice states that Epic “will lose access to . . . . [a]ll Apple software, SDKs, APIs, and developer tools” and “[p]re-release versions of iOS, iPaD OS, macOS, tvOS [and] watchOS”."

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple threatened to revoke all Apple software, SDKs, APIs, and developer tools, and argues that these rights were governed by agreements separate from the Fortnite PLA.

„Apple has barred Epic’s access to iOS in its capacity as an app distributor."

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple barred Epic’s access to iOS as an app distributor and prevented Epic from placing a competing app store on iOS.

„The -- the one game Fortnite, updates to that game and that game have been taken off of the App Store site."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple’s counsel states that Fortnite updates were unavailable and that Apple had removed the game from the App Store, contradicting the claim that Epic continued to have access through the License Agreement and continued making sales through iOS in-app purchases.

AI explanation, to verify: The Court treated Fortnite as unavailable on the App Store after Apple's removal, contradicting the claim that Apple continued to offer Epic access to iOS through the existing arrangement.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple’s counsel stated that Epic would not receive Unreal Engine support unless it cured the Fortnite breach, contradicting the claim that Apple continued to offer Epic access without qualification.

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple removed Fortnite, terminated the relevant developer account, and prevented updates, contrary to continued meaningful access.

AI explanation, to verify: The order states that Fortnite was removed from the App Store and remains unavailable, contradicting the claim that Epic continued to have access through the iOS app and IAP.

„the App Store is currently the only platform by which developers can reach the approximately one billion iOS users"

AI explanation, to verify: Epic states that the App Store was the only platform through which developers could reach approximately one billion iOS users and describes Apple’s restrictions as coercive, contrary to Apple’s assertion that access remained available on its terms.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly states that Apple IAP was nonfunctioning after termination and that the app could display only Epic’s direct payment option. This conflicts with the claim that Epic continued making Fortnite sales through Apple IAP.

„One is that the IOS business for Epic has been shuttered."

AI explanation, to verify: The court stated that Epic’s iOS business had been shuttered and that Apple’s actions affected access to Apple’s developer programs, which is inconsistent with the claim that Apple continued to offer Epic effective access through the license agreement.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple removed Fortnite, rejected builds containing Epic direct payment, and terminated Epic's developer account, contradicting the assertion that Epic continued to have access through the license agreement and continued making iOS sales through In-App Purchase.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple’s restrictions make the App Store the only method for distributing iOS apps and that Apple has monopoly power over iOS app distribution, contradicting the assertion that Epic could continue making Fortnite sales through iOS IAP while retaining meaningful access.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that iOS users were required to use Apple's IAP and that Apple removed Fortnite, contradicting the claim that Epic continued making Fortnite sales through iOS and IAP after the relevant enforcement action.

„Apple rejected them all, and still proceeded to terminate Epic’s Developer Program account."

AI explanation, to verify: Epic states that Apple terminated Epic’s developer access and blocked submitted Fortnite builds, contrary to the claim that Epic continued to have meaningful access through the existing arrangement.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration argues that Apple has market power concerns but that Epic has alternative monetization options and can sell content outside the App Store, conflicting with the claim that Epic continues to make Fortnite sales through Apple's IAP under the asserted circumstances.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that without an Apple Developer Program account, developers cannot develop, test, or distribute commercial iOS software, and that loss of Apple's tools would prevent Unreal Engine support. This is inconsistent with the claim that Apple had not denied Epic access to an essential facility and that Epic continued unimpeded access through the agreement.

„In 2016, Apple lowered its commission from 30% to 15% on subscriptions that renew after the first year."

AI explanation, to verify: The claim denies that Apple charges a 30% IAP fee, while the document states that Apple charges a 30% commission and later reduced certain subscription commissions to 15%.

„Consistent with the practices of other mobile platforms, Apple retains at most a 30% commission on sales made for digital products that are used within the iPhone ecosystem (including apps and in-app purchases)."

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly states that Apple retains at most a 30% commission on digital sales, contrary to the claim that Apple denies charging a 30% fee for IAP.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic expressly refers to Apple's 30% tax on in-app purchases, contradicting Apple's denial that it charges a 30% fee for IAP.

„IAP is a mechanism imposed on developers and that charges developers a fee for a transaction"

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration repeatedly states that Apple charges developers commissions through IAP, contrary to the denial that Apple charges a 30% fee, although it does not independently specify the 30% rate in the quoted passage.

„Apple is able to take an exorbitant 30% fee on all in-app purchases of in-app content."

AI explanation, to verify: The complaint repeatedly alleges that Apple charges a 30% fee on in-app purchases.

„Apple’s IAP takes 30%."

AI explanation, to verify: The motion expressly states that Apple’s IAP takes a 30% commission, contrary to Apple’s denial that it charges a 30% fee for In-App Purchase.

„Apple’s collection of a 30% commission does not turn it into a “payment processor”"

AI explanation, to verify: Apple’s statement says developers contractually agree to pay Apple a commission and specifically describes a 30% commission, contrary to the claim that Apple denies charging a 30% IAP fee.

„The agreement between Apple and Epic provides that Apple would receive a 30% commission from each of these payments"

AI explanation, to verify: The claim denies that Apple charges a 30% IAP fee, while the declaration expressly states that Apple receives a 30% commission on those payments.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly states that Apple charges a 30% commission on applicable purchases, contrary to the claim that Apple denies charging such a fee.

„Apple has never raised the 30 percent base commission it charges from developers."

AI explanation, to verify: The claim denies that Apple charges a 30 percent IAP fee, while the declaration expressly states that Apple charges a 30 percent base commission.

„Apple charges a fixed percentage commission on downloads of paid apps and in-app purchases of digital goods and services via the IAP system."

AI explanation, to verify: The document repeatedly states that Apple charges a 30% commission on in-app purchases, although it characterizes that charge as compensation for App Store services rather than a payment-processing fee.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple's counsel expressly acknowledged that Apple set and charged a 30 percent commission, contradicting a claim that Apple did not charge a 30 percent fee for IAP.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store on August 13, while it does not state that Epic removed In-App Purchase on August 28 or that external payment became the sole method.

„at which point Apple blocked Apple’s IAP from Fortnite"

AI explanation, to verify: The answer states that Apple, rather than Epic, blocked IAP after terminating the account, contradicting the claim that Epic removed IAP and left its external system as the sole method.

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple blocked Fortnite's IAP functionality when it terminated Epic's Team ID account, and that Epic did not make changes causing IAP to become unavailable.

„On the morning of August 13, 2020, Epic’s servers began informing the Fortnite iOS app that an Epic direct payment option was available along with Apple’s IAP."

AI explanation, to verify: The motion states that Epic offered both payment options alongside each other on August 13 and that Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store, not that Epic removed IAP on August 28 and left direct payment as the sole method.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration says Apple removed Fortnite on August 13 and that the alternative payment option remained available to users who had already downloaded the game; it does not state that IAP was removed on August 28.

AI explanation, to verify: The order states that Epic activated the direct-payment mechanism on August 13 and that Apple removed Fortnite the same day, contradicting the claim's assertion that IAP was removed on August 28 and that the external mechanism was then the sole method.

„Epic’s hotfix update offered IAP and Epic direct pay side-by-side. IAP remained available in Fortnite until Apple blocked IAP upon termination of Epic’s Team ID ’84 account."

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly states that IAP remained available alongside Epic Direct Pay until Apple blocked it, contradicting the assertion that Epic removed IAP and made the external mechanism the sole purchase method on August 28.

AI explanation, to verify: The order states that Apple removed Fortnite on August 13, so the document does not support the claim that Epic removed IAP on August 28 while leaving the external mechanism as the sole method.

„If they simply go back to status quo ante, as Your Honor said, before August 3, then they will be back in the App Store"

AI explanation, to verify: The hearing occurred on August 24, 2020 and Apple represented that Fortnite could return to the App Store if Epic cured its breach, so it does not support a claim that IAP was removed on August 28 and became the sole purchase method.

AI explanation, to verify: The transcript states that Fortnite was taken off the App Store before the hearing and that only updates were unavailable, while the claim asserts that IAP was removed on August 28 and the external mechanism became the sole purchase method. The transcript also places the hearing on August 19, before August 28.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration says Epic personnel repeatedly threatened to terminate the Apple relationship and remove its games from iOS.

„Epic apparently intended to “pursue” its “disagreement” with Apple by simply disregarding its obligations under the License Agreement and Guidelines."

AI explanation, to verify: The document alleges that Epic planned to disregard its contractual obligations and that its CEO announced an intentional breach on August 13, 2020. That is plainly inconsistent with the claim that Epic never threatened or considered terminating its relationship with Apple.

„Epic will no longer adhere to Apple’s payment processing restrictions."

AI explanation, to verify: The document records Sweeney’s stated intent to breach Apple’s payment restrictions and to remain in conflict with Apple, contrary to the claim that Epic never threatened to terminate or remove its games from iOS.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration recounts Epic’s June and July requests for a special deal, its August threat and unilateral change, and its decision to litigate.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Epic threatened to remove Fortnite from iOS and deliberately chose to proceed despite anticipating removal, which is inconsistent with never threatening or considering termination.

„“Epic will no longer adhere to Apple’s payment processing restrictions.”"

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Epic expressly announced its intent to breach Apple’s payment restrictions and deliberately activated a concealed payment mechanism.

AI explanation, to verify: The Court recounted Sweeney’s statement that Epic would continue pursuing its disagreement with Apple and described Epic’s later calculated breach and litigation campaign.

„Epic will regrettably be in conflict with Apple on a multitude of fronts for so long as it takes to bring about change, if necessary, for many years."

AI explanation, to verify: The transcript records Epic's deliberate decision to activate direct payments, breach the contract, and pursue a prolonged fight with Apple, contrary to the claim that Epic never threatened termination or considered ending the relationship.

„Apple gave Epic the -- the opportunity to cure, to come back on to the App Store with that new release, and Epic refused."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple's counsel stated that Epic breached its agreement and refused Apple's opportunity to cure, and the transcript records Epic's decision to activate the hot fix and proceed despite Apple's restrictions.

AI explanation, to verify: The filing states that Epic chose not to comply with Apple’s policies and describes the consequences of that choice, including removal and termination-related actions.

„Following Epic’s open, admitted, and deliberate breach of its contractual obligations and the cold-blooded launch of its “hotfix,” Apple rightfully enforced its rights under the contractual agreements and the Guidelines by removing the non-compliant Fortnite app from the App Store."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple attributes Fortnite’s removal to Epic’s deliberate contractual breach rather than to Apple’s unilateral actions.

„Although Epic’s willful violation of multiple contractual requirements has led to Fortnite’s removal form the App Store, Fortnite remains widely available on Microsoft Windows, macOS, PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Nintendo Switch, and Android."

AI explanation, to verify: The document attributes Fortnite’s removal to Epic’s deliberate breach and activation of the unauthorized payment mechanism, not solely to Apple’s actions.

„iOS Fortnite users who had updated to Version 13.40 continued to have a choice between Apple’s IAP and Epic Direct Pay until Apple terminated Epic’s ’84 Developer Account on August 28, 2020"

AI explanation, to verify: Epic attributes the disruption to Apple’s termination and blocking of Fortnite access rather than to Epic’s own conduct.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration says Fortnite became unavailable because Epic introduced the unauthorized payment option and refused to remove it, contrary to the claim that Apple's actions caused the unavailability.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Epic activated the alternative payment system, refused to cure the breach, and thereby caused Apple to remove Fortnite, directly contradicting the claim that Apple’s actions caused the unavailability.

AI explanation, to verify: The Court found that Epic strategically breached its agreements and that Fortnite’s predicament was of Epic’s own making, rather than solely resulting from Apple’s actions.

„Epic’s breach was flagrant. Epic willfully “direct[ed] customers to purchasing mechanisms other than in-app purchase” and created a new “storefront” in contravention of the Guidelines."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly attributes Fortnite’s removal and the resulting harm to Epic’s deliberate breach and hidden payment mechanism.

„When we hear about complaints from customers by Epic, that is solely of their doing."

AI explanation, to verify: The Court and Apple repeatedly attributed Fortnite's unavailability and resulting customer complaints to Epic's deliberate activation of unauthorized payment functionality.

„Epic has unilaterally breached the contract and created a crisis of its own making and is now coming to the court and asking for immediate relief from that crisis."

AI explanation, to verify: The transcript records Apple's assertion that Epic changed the status quo through the hot fix and created the crisis, contradicting the claim that Fortnite's unavailability resulted solely from Apple's actions.

AI explanation, to verify: The Court expressly described the payment functionality as allegedly hidden code, contrary to Epic's assertion that there was no hidden code.

„Epic had hidden a new payment interface via what Epic calls a “hotfix”"

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly alleges that Epic concealed a new payment interface in a hotfix and used it to evade Apple’s review.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple characterizes the payment mechanism as a hidden change deliberately concealed from App Review, directly contradicting the claim that there was no hidden or nefarious code.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration directly states that Epic had hidden and undisclosed the payment mechanism and activated it later through a hot fix.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Epic concealed an unauthorized payment feature in Fortnite and activated it through a hot fix after notifying Apple, directly conflicting with the claim that there was no hidden code or nefarious conduct.

„Hours later, Epic activated a secretly planted payment mechanism in Fortnite to slide a non-approved change into the app that blatantly evaded App Review."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple’s opposition says Epic secretly planted and activated the payment mechanism to evade App Review, directly conflicting with Epic’s characterization of the code as routine and non-nefarious.

„Epic Games did this despite receiving an unambiguous refusal from Apple only a few weeks prior to the introduction of its hotfix."

AI explanation, to verify: The Court found that Epic used a covert hotfix to add a substantive payment feature and intentionally failed to disclose it, rejecting Epic’s characterization of the conduct as non-deceptive routine hotfix use.

„Epic achieved its objective through trickery."

AI explanation, to verify: The document repeatedly characterizes the hotfix as concealed and deceptive, directly conflicting with the claim that there was no hidden code and that the hotfix was not nefarious.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration repeatedly characterizes Epic’s payment activation as a violation of Apple’s rules and refers to Epic’s choice to violate its developer contract, contrary to the claim that there was no concealed or nefarious conduct.

„new code was submitted on August 3 that contained a latent feature activated 10 days later."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration characterizes the payment feature as latent functionality submitted in the update and says its nondisclosure obstructed review, which conflicts with the claim’s assertion that there was no hidden code or concealment.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly says that the App Store is the only approved commercial distribution channel for iOS apps and that users cannot download apps from a browser.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic's admission that the App Store is the only platform for reaching approximately one billion iOS users contradicts Apple's denial that the App Store is the sole means of accessing apps for iOS users.

„Apple’s monetization strategy, which results from its making the App Store the exclusive channel for app distribution"

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple’s policies make the App Store the exclusive channel for app distribution and discusses Apple’s monopoly power over iOS app distribution.

AI explanation, to verify: The complaint alleges that Apple foreclosed alternative iOS distribution channels and that developers are forced to use the App Store.

„Likewise, Apple’s App Store is the only channel through which app developers can distribute their apps to iOS users."

AI explanation, to verify: The motion expressly alleges that Apple’s App Store was the only channel for distributing apps to iOS users and that Apple had a monopoly in that market. This directly conflicts with Apple’s denial that the App Store was the sole means of access.

„There are no alternative options to distribute consumer apps to iOS users, and through the restrictions, Apple maintains a complete monopoly in the iOS App Distribution Market."

AI explanation, to verify: The document directly argues that Apple has complete control over iOS app distribution and that there are no alternative ways to distribute consumer apps to iOS users.

„As a result, Apple’s App Store accounts for all downstream distribution of apps for the iOS software platform."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple has substantial market power and that the App Store accounts for all downstream distribution of iOS apps.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly states that the App Store was the only way to access Epic's games on iOS and that Apple barred alternate stores and direct downloads.

„Epic is not likely to succeed on the merits of its antitrust claims that Apple unlawfully maintains a monopoly or that Apple’s requirements relating to its In-App Purchase feature constitute a tying arrangement"

AI explanation, to verify: The Court rejected Epic’s tying claim concerning Apple’s In-App Purchase requirements, consistent with Apple’s position that the tying theory fails.

„Another restriction that Apple imposes on iOS is to mandate use of IAP, Apple’s payment processor, for all in-app purchases of in-app digital content."

AI explanation, to verify: The motion expressly alleges that Apple requires digital-content developers to use IAP and ties that requirement to access to the iOS ecosystem. This conflicts directly with Apple's assertion that distribution does not require IAP.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple requires iOS users purchasing digital content to use Apple’s IAP and imposes a 30% commission on those transactions.

„The only way to sell in-app digital content on iOS is through IAP (subject to Apple’s arbitrary unilaterally determined exceptions). That is conditioning, and that is a tie."

AI explanation, to verify: Epic argues that Apple conditions access to iOS app distribution on use of IAP for digital content, rejecting Apple’s characterization of the requirement as merely commission-based.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic states that Apple requires certain developers to use IAP for specified in-app purchases and charges commissions on those transactions, contrary to the claim’s characterization of the tying theory.

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple’s agreements and guidelines generally did not permit developers to circumvent the IAP system, contradicting the claim that Apple did not require IAP processing for digital in-app purchases.

„The fact that the app developer might be able to develop a different app employing a different business model does not change the fact that for the universe of apps that do sell digital upgrades and other content, Apple employs a tie."

AI explanation, to verify: The document directly rejects the theory that there is no tie merely because developers are not required to offer in-app purchases, explaining that the tie applies to apps that do offer digital content.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple requires developers offering digital-content in-app purchases to use IAP, directly contradicting the claim that Apple does not require IAP merely to distribute an app.

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Epic was prohibited from using alternative mechanisms for in-app transactions and that Apple collected commissions through IAP, which is inconsistent with the claim that Apple does not require IAP for digital in-app purchases.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that the only approved way to make an iOS app commercially available is through Apple's App Store and that iOS users cannot download apps from a web browser.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic expressly admits that the App Store is currently the only platform through which developers can reach approximately one billion iOS users, contradicting Apple's assertion that it is not the sole means of accessing or distributing apps to iOS users.

„Those conclusions were the foundation for my subsequent finding concerning Apple’s monopoly power over iOS app distribution."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly opines that smartphone software platforms are a relevant market, that Apple has substantial monopoly power, and that Apple controls iOS app distribution.

„Apple has a monopoly in the iOS App Distribution Market. This is because the App Store is the sole means by which apps may be distributed to consumers in that market."

AI explanation, to verify: The complaint defines distinct iOS app distribution and in-app payment processing markets, alleges Apple’s monopoly, and asserts that the App Store is the sole practical distribution channel.

„Epic showed that Apple is a monopolist in two markets, for iOS app distribution and for iOS in-app payment processing"

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly asserts that Apple has complete control over iOS app distribution and describes Apple as a monopolist in both app distribution and payment processing.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly identifies relevant markets for iOS app distribution and in-app payment processing and concludes that Apple has monopoly power in them.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly states that Apple is the only permitted route for accessing apps on iOS and that alternate stores and direct downloads are blocked.

„to avoid being banned from the App Store, Apple requires developers to use Apple’s IAP for in-app purchases of digital content."

AI explanation, to verify: The document directly states that Apple requires developers to use IAP for digital in-app purchases as a condition of remaining on the App Store.

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple requires developers of digital-content apps to use Apple's IAP payment processor, rather than merely allowing developers to choose among business models without tying payment processing to distribution.

„The main mechanism by which developers pay Apple is through its in-app purchase (IAP) technology."

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that developers must use Apple’s IAP functionality for digital transactions in the App Store, contrary to the claim that developers may choose other business models without that requirement.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic expressly rejects Apple’s argument that developers’ ability to choose other business models means there is no tying of app distribution and payment processing.

„Apple allows developers to use their own payment processing, which customers use, in the following cases"

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple requires IAP for many in-app purchases and treats the availability of limited exceptions as evidence of separate demand, contrary to the claim that developers generally may choose other business models without a tie.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple’s guidelines expressly require IAP for digital features and prohibit external purchasing links, contradicting the broad assertion that Apple does not tie IAP to iOS app distribution merely because developers may choose other business models.

AI explanation, to verify: The motion directly rejects the assertion that developers may freely choose other payment mechanisms for digital in-app content, stating that Apple’s rules require IAP as a condition of App Store access.

„Apple Manifestly Lacks Monopoly Power"

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly denies that the alleged iOS distribution and payment-processing markets establish monopoly power and argues that the proposed markets are legally and factually improper.

„Epic is not likely to succeed on the merits of its antitrust claims that Apple unlawfully maintains a monopoly"

AI explanation, to verify: The order expressly concludes that Epic was not likely to succeed on its claim that Apple unlawfully maintained a monopoly.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly denies being a monopolist and emphasizes competition from other smartphone platforms.

„Apple specifically denies that it has a monopoly in any market"

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly denies that it is a monopolist in any market.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration disputes treating Apple as a monopolist solely in app distribution and instead argues that the relevant economic product is a two-sided transaction platform.

„I conclude that Epic and Dr. Evans are wrong to assert that Apple is a monopoly with a 100 percent share of the relevant antitrust market."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly concludes that Apple is not a monopolist in the properly defined market and estimates Apple's share at roughly 10 to 20 percent.

„We would suggest it still does not have market power in in-app distribution because there's so much competition in it."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple's counsel expressly argues that Apple lacks market power and faces substantial competition, contradicting the assertion that Apple is a monopolist.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic admits that Apple requires certain developers to use IAP for certain in-app purchases, directly conflicting with Apple's denial that it coerces developers into using IAP.

„Apple’s requirement to use its IAP payment method for direct transactions between developers and users of iOS apps"

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration directly describes Apple’s requirement that developers use IAP for in-app purchases and analyzes payment processing as a separate product.

AI explanation, to verify: The complaint expressly alleges that Apple coerces developers to use In-App Purchase and identifies a distinct iOS In-App Payment Processing Market.

„Apple does not dispute that it contractually conditions developers’ ability to distribute iOS apps on their agreement to use solely Apple’s own IAP"

AI explanation, to verify: The filing states that Apple contractually conditions iOS app distribution on exclusive use of Apple’s IAP and treats the services as separate products.

AI explanation, to verify: The order expressly states that Apple’s guidelines require IAP for in-app purchases and identifies this requirement as coercion, contrary to the claim that Apple denies coercing developers.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple requires digital-content developers to use IAP and concludes that third-party payment processing is a separate relevant market, contrary to the denial of coercion and such a market.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that iOS users wishing to purchase digital content are required to use Apple’s IAP, directly contradicting the denial that Apple coerces developers into using it.

„There is also a tension between Plaintiff’s claim and the correct teaching in the Amex ruling: in the case of a transaction platform such as the App Store that supplies one product – transactions, it makes no economic sense to consider inputs into transactions production that are simultaneously engaged in fixed proportions as actually or potentially separate markets."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration affirms that Apple requires IAP for digital-content transactions, but it argues against treating IAP as a separate payment-processing market and against the characterization as coercion.

„Within hours, Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store"

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple removed Fortnite within hours on August 13, whereas the claim says the choice continued until August 28.

„Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store and expelled Epic from the developer program."

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Apple removed Fortnite and expelled Epic from the developer program after the hotfix, without describing a continued choice between Apple IAP and Epic Direct Pay until August 28.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration says Apple removed Fortnite shortly after the August 13 payment change, whereas the claim says the payment choice continued until August 28 account termination.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple removed Fortnite on August 13 after Epic refused to remove the alternative payment option, rather than leaving the choice in place until August 28.

AI explanation, to verify: The order states that Apple removed Fortnite on August 13, after which it remained unavailable, rather than allowing the payment choice to continue until August 28.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple removed Fortnite on August 13 but terminated Epic’s developer account on August 28, supporting the claim that the payment choice and app status were not immediately eliminated by the August 13 notice alone.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration states that Apple posted a termination notice on August 14, rather than August 13, and that termination would occur only after 14 days unless conditions were met.

„your app has been removed from the App Store until we receive an update that is compliant with the App Store Review Guidelines"

AI explanation, to verify: The document says Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store on August 13 after identifying violations, while Epic’s claim says the payment choice continued until the later account termination.

AI explanation, to verify: The order characterizes Epic’s code as allegedly hidden and says Epic activated it on August 13, contrary to the claim that the payment processing was not hidden.

„Epic had hidden a new payment interface via what Epic calls a “hotfix”—coding that queries and imports data directly from Epic’s servers to the app—into this new version."

AI explanation, to verify: The document alleges that Epic concealed the new payment interface through a server-controlled hotfix and that the feature was not approved or reviewed by Apple.

„in order to conceal the change from Apple, Epic caused the change to come from its own servers"

AI explanation, to verify: The document says the direct-payment functionality was concealed from App Review and delivered through a server-side hotfix, contrary to the claim that it was not hidden and that Apple knew where to find it.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic’s claim says the payment processing was not hidden, while the declaration states that Epic planted the payment mechanism without disclosing it to Apple and activated it later.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration characterizes the payment mechanism as hidden and undisclosed to Apple before activation.

AI explanation, to verify: The Court found that the hotfix was not fully disclosed and was clandestinely introduced, contrary to the claim that the payment processing was not hidden.

„In order to deliberately conceal the change from Apple, Epic changed the option on its own servers to enable the approved version of Fortnite to offer a non-compliant in-app purchase option."

AI explanation, to verify: The document states that Epic secretly activated a non-approved payment mechanism and specifically disputes accepting Epic's account that the hotfix was a routine or properly disclosed change. This conflicts with the claim that the payment processing was not hidden.

„Apple is a monopolist. It controls all app distribution on iOS. It controls all in-app payment processing for digital content on iOS."

AI explanation, to verify: The motion treats app distribution and in-app payment processing as distinct markets and states that Apple controls both. That directly conflicts with the assertion that no separate demand exists for IAP.

„There is therefore material demand, by users and developers, for application distributors that is separate from the demand for software platforms."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple’s claim says there is no demand for IAP separate from App Store distribution, while the declaration states that there is material demand for application distribution separate from the software platform and separately analyzes payment processing as a distinct product.

„Apple admits that the In-App Purchase API can be used, among other things, for the seamless purchase of digital content for use in an app."

AI explanation, to verify: The claim says no demand exists for IAP separately from App Store distribution, while the answer admits that the In-App Purchase API enables purchases of digital content within apps and separately discusses the App Store.

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly states that there is separate demand for payment processing apart from app-store services and that third parties provide such processing separately.

„Epic Games shows that at least some developers have demanded separate payment processing services based on these features, independent of Apple’s 30%."

AI explanation, to verify: Although the court found the existing record insufficient to establish separate demand conclusively, it identified evidence that developers demanded separate payment-processing services and said such demand could plausibly be shown.

„There is a relevant product market for the processing of payments for in-app products on devices running iOS: the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market."

AI explanation, to verify: The document asserts that there is a distinct market for iOS in-app payment processing and describes alternative payment systems being offered in relevant contexts.

„Epic has revealed that it is willing to and can circumvent Apple’s procedures in Fortnite by smuggling a hidden feature into its last update."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly asserts that Epic's circumvention created security and safety concerns, contrary to Epic's claim that Apple's justifications are pretextual and unsupported by a security threat.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple provides an extensive security and privacy justification for its restrictions and states that unauthorized payment functionality could threaten the ecosystem.

AI explanation, to verify: Epic calls Apple’s security and privacy justifications pretextual, while Apple expressly denies that characterization and asserts responsibility for privacy and security standards.

„Apple’s business model and app curation also benefits consumers in the form of enhanced security."

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly defends Apple's security and privacy rationale and describes curation as providing enhanced security, contrary to the claim that those justifications are pretextual.

„Less than 1 percent of malware attacks occur within the App Store."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple's counsel defends its restrictions as necessary for security and privacy and cites the low incidence of malware in the App Store, contrary to the claim that those justifications are pretextual.

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly alleges that Epic's hotfix compromised Apple's security and privacy protections, contrary to Epic's claim that Apple's security justifications are pretextual and unsupported by a threat.

„the security and privacy of the App Store, the iPhone, and end users"

AI explanation, to verify: The order treats Apple's security and privacy concerns as legitimate interests weighing against Epic's requested relief, contrary to Epic's characterization of those justifications as pretextual.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple’s declaration asserts that its payment and review requirements serve security and privacy purposes and describes the risks of permitting external payment mechanisms.

„Apple’s published App Store review policies and procedures appear to me to be well considered"

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly opines that Apple’s review policies are reasonable and that Epic’s undisclosed payment functionality obstructed informed security review, contrary to the claim that Apple’s security justifications were pretextual and unsupported by evidence of risk.

AI explanation, to verify: The order characterizes Epic's conduct as intentional and self-help, contrary to the claim that Epic's hot fix was innocuous and not objectionable.

„their uses are generally to fix or patch critical bugs or defects—not to enact substantive and significant new features."

AI explanation, to verify: The Court found that Epic used the hotfix clandestinely to add a substantive feature violating Apple’s rules and failed to disclose it, rather than treating the conduct as an ordinary bug fix.

„Epic is a saboteur, not a martyr."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly describes Epic as a saboteur and calls the hotfix an intentional and concealed breach, directly contradicting the claim that Epic was not a cheater or saboteur.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly characterizes Epic's conduct as hidden, unauthorized, and dishonest, contrary to the claim that Epic was not a cheater or saboteur.

„Epic made a deliberate choice to cheat Apple."

AI explanation, to verify: The document repeatedly characterizes Epic's conduct as deliberate cheating, concealment, and a flagrant violation, directly conflicting with the assertion that Epic was not a cheater or saboteur. The document also says Apple disputes Epic's characterization of hotfixes as routine.

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly describes Epic’s conduct as deceptive, deceitful, and not forthright, which conflicts with the assertion that Epic was not a cheater or saboteur and that the hotfix was non-nefarious.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple describes the hotfix as concealed conduct that bypassed review and breached the parties' agreements, contrary to the claim that it was an ordinary mechanism previously used without objection.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration characterizes the hotfix as concealing new payment functionality and obstructing Apple’s review, which is inconsistent with describing it simply as an unobjectionable common mechanism.

„Thus, the demand for payment processing is separate from the demand for distribution services."

AI explanation, to verify: The document treats app distribution and IAP as distinct services and argues that Apple contractually ties them together, contrary to the claim that IAP is merely an integrated App Store function with no separate demand.

„There are a number of third-party payment processors such as Braintree, PayPal, Square, and Stripe. Alternatively, some developers, like Epic, have developed their own payment processing solutions."

AI explanation, to verify: The complaint describes IAP as a distinct payment-processing market with third-party alternatives and alleges that Apple conditions App Store access on use of IAP, contrary to the assertion that IAP is merely an integrated App Store function with no separate demand.

„The App Store and IAP are separate products in separate markets under the purchaser demand test"

AI explanation, to verify: The motion expressly characterizes the App Store and IAP as separate products in separate markets and argues that alternative payment systems satisfy separate demand.

„Epic has shown the first element of tying: two separate products."

AI explanation, to verify: Epic disputes that there is no separate demand for Apple’s payment processing and argues that IAP is separate from app distribution.

„We further know that when Epic offered iOS users of Fortnite the choice between IAP and Epic Direct Pay, customers utilized Epic Direct Pay for 73 percent of transactions."

AI explanation, to verify: The document directly disputes the absence of separate demand, citing developers' desire for alternatives, actual use of Epic Direct Pay, and third-party payment processing.

„There is therefore material demand by developers to use third-party payment processing services for in-app transactions in the absence of restrictions."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly identifies separate demand for third-party payment processing and concludes that payment processing is a separate product from the App Store.

„As an economic matter, payment processing for in-app transactions in iOS apps is a separate and distinct product from the App Store."

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly concludes that payment processing for in-app transactions is economically separate from the App Store, contrary to the claim that the products are not separate.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly argues that payment processing is a separate product from app-store services and that labeling IAP as an input or component does not end the antitrust inquiry.

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly treats App Store distribution and In-App Purchase as separate contractual requirements and identifies them as distinct products in separate markets, contrary to the claim that they are not separate products.

„The App Store and IAP are separate products in separate markets under the purchaser demand test"

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly argues that App Store distribution and IAP are separate products in separate markets, directly opposing the claim that they are not separate products.

„Apple ties these two separate products."

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly argues that app distribution and IAP are separate products and that Apple’s rules constitute an unlawful tie.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple argues that IAP is not a separate product and that requiring it is lawful rather than per se illegal tying.

„Epic is not likely to succeed on the merits of its antitrust claims that Apple unlawfully maintains a monopoly or that Apple’s requirements relating to its In-App Purchase feature constitute a tying arrangement"

AI explanation, to verify: The order concludes that Epic is not likely to succeed on its claim that Apple’s In-App Purchase requirements constitute an unlawful tying arrangement.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly argues that Epic’s tying theory will fail and that IAP is not a separate product or market.

„Apple lacks monopoly power within such a market, with its share in such a market being low, between roughly 10 and 20 percent depending on the measure used."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration concludes that Apple lacks monopoly power in the properly defined market and describes Epic’s proposed alternatives as potentially harmful rather than treating Apple’s conduct as per se illegal tying.

„No Anticompetitive Tie Can Exist Between App Distribution and IAP Payment Administration"

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration rejects Epic's characterization of the arrangement as an anticompetitive tie and argues that there is insufficient separate demand for IAP administration to constitute a distinct tied product market.

„The App Store is the world’s most trusted marketplace for apps precisely because of the standards and safeguards put in place."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple asserts that its security rationale is genuine and points to malware and security vulnerabilities associated with distribution outside curated app stores.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple asserts that the security rationale is substantive and that unauthorized changes threaten users and the ecosystem, directly contradicting Epic’s pretext argument.

„The record is devoid of any evidence to support such a finding or inference."

AI explanation, to verify: The Court rejected Apple’s security concerns as unsupported in the record and found that continued access could be conditioned on compliance rather than requiring removal of the affiliates.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly defends its restrictions and removal policies as measures designed to protect security, privacy, and users, contradicting the claim that the security rationale is pretextual.

„The iPhone ecosystem is known to have significantly fewer problems with security and malware compared to the more open Android ecosystem."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration presents security, privacy, curation, and malware prevention as legitimate benefits of Apple’s controlled App Store model. This directly conflicts with the claim that Apple’s security rationale was merely pretextual.

„The foundation of the App Store is that consumers can safely and easily download apps for their iPhones and iPads that perform as promised, do not jeopardize the security of their devices, and offer the privacy protections that consumers have come to expect from Apple."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration presents security and privacy concerns as genuine reasons for Apple’s review and termination policies, contrary to the claim that Apple’s security rationale was pretextual.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration presents Apple’s security rationale as genuine, stating that Epic’s undisclosed functionality obstructed informed review and increased security risks.

„Epic sought to enjoy all of the benefits of Apple’s iOS platform and related services while its “hotfix” lined Epic’s pockets at Apple’s expense."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple alleges that Epic’s conduct deprived Apple of commissions and caused contractual and other injury.

AI explanation, to verify: The document alleges that Epic's conduct deprived Apple of commissions and injured Apple's economic relationships.

„Apple was therefore paid nothing on those purchases made by customers redirected to Epic"

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly claims that Epic's conduct denied Apple agreed commissions and caused harm to Apple's business model and investments.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly claims that Apple received no commissions on diverted purchases and suffered economic consequences from Epic’s conduct.

„Apple's willing to -- since this court is involved and the court's supervision, if Epic would just come into compliance, it can free Fortnite."

AI explanation, to verify: Apple presented evidence and argument that it lost commissions and faced harm to its business model, security commitments, and ecosystem, which is inconsistent with a categorical claim that Apple suffered no injury.

„If developers can avoid the digital checkout, it is the same as if a customer leaves an Apple retail store without paying for shoplifted products: Apple does not get paid."

AI explanation, to verify: The document asserts that Apple suffered financial and business-model harm from Epic’s bypass of IAP and unpaid commissions.

„IAP Is Not a Separate Market or Product"

AI explanation, to verify: Apple argues that IAP is not a separate market or product and rejects Epic’s tying theory.

„Epic is not likely to succeed on the merits of its antitrust claims that Apple unlawfully maintains a monopoly or that Apple’s requirements relating to its In-App Purchase feature constitute a tying arrangement"

AI explanation, to verify: The order expressly concludes that Epic was not likely to succeed on its tying claim involving Apple's In-App Purchase requirement.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly rejects Epic’s tying theory and argues that IAP is not a separate product or market.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple denies that IAP constitutes a separate market or payment processor and presents it as the means of collecting agreed commissions.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly rejects the characterization of app distribution and IAP as separate products and states that there is insufficient demand for IAP administration separate from app distribution.

„IAP Is Not a Separate Market or Product"

AI explanation, to verify: The document expressly rejects Epic’s tying theory by arguing that IAP is not a separate market or product.

„Epic is not likely to succeed on the merits of its antitrust claims that Apple unlawfully maintains a monopoly or that Apple’s requirements relating to its In-App Purchase feature constitute a tying arrangement"

AI explanation, to verify: The Court rejected Epic’s likelihood of success on its tying claim, contradicting Epic’s assertion that Apple’s IAP requirement is an unlawful tie.

AI explanation, to verify: Apple expressly argues that App Store distribution and IAP are not separate products or markets, defeating the asserted tying theory.

„Apple’s In-App Purchase (IAP) function is not a “payment processor[]” within some imagined “iOS In-App Payment Processing Market”"

AI explanation, to verify: Apple denies that distribution and payment processing are separate products and characterizes IAP as part of the App Store’s commission model.

„I find that there is insufficient demand for in-app payment administration—as performed by the IAP system—separate from the demand for app distribution, such that one could identify a distinct product market in which it is efficient to offer in-app payment processing separately from app distribution."

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly rejects the view that app distribution and IAP are separate products with separate demand. It states that there is insufficient demand for IAP administration separate from app distribution.

„Apple retaliated with ferocity."

AI explanation, to verify: Epic's motion repeatedly characterizes Apple's actions as retaliation rather than ordinary contractual enforcement. This directly contradicts Apple's description of its response.

AI explanation, to verify: The declaration expressly characterizes Apple’s removal of Fortnite and related actions as retaliation rather than merely contractual enforcement.

„Apple’s retaliation is not directed against the method by which Epic introduced competing payment processing functionality; Apple is objecting to the fact that Epic introduced competition offering consumers lower prices."

AI explanation, to verify: Epic repeatedly characterizes Apple’s termination and other measures as retaliation designed to suppress competition rather than ordinary contractual enforcement.

„Apple’s retaliation was swift and decisive."

AI explanation, to verify: The document describes Apple's response as retaliation for Epic's payment system and lawsuit, directly conflicting with the claim that it was merely enforcement of contractual consequences.

AI explanation, to verify: The document disputes that Apple’s actions were merely enforcement of contractual consequences, arguing that Apple’s response exceeded the contract allegedly breached and constituted retaliation.