Epic fights Apple’s bid to seal key data behind proposed fees on linked-out purchases
Epic says Apple is making overly broad requests to seal information it says is central to determining what the company can charge developers for linked-out purchases. Here are the details.
Epic Technologies has lodged an objection to Apple's proposal outlining the commission rates it intends to charge for purchases made outside the App Store through external links. Apple's proposal suggests a 15% commission for standard apps, followed by 10% for Video Partner Program (VPP), News Partner Program (NPP), Mini Apps Partner Program (MPP), and subscription renewals, and 5% for Small Business Program apps.
In support of its request, Apple has submitted expert reports, which it seeks to seal portions of, citing commercial sensitivity.
Epic, however, has filed an opposition to Apple's request, arguing that the company is attempting to conceal essential information from the public and obstruct the legal proceedings. Epic maintains that Apple has not demonstrated a sufficient justification for sealing certain portions of its proffer and supporting expert reports.
The company asserts that high thresholds must be met for keeping court records inaccessible to the public, especially when the information is crucial in determining the proposed commission rates. Epic cites previous court decisions that rejected sealing requests due to lack of specific harm, unsubstantiated allegations, or general justifications.
Epic also points out that some of the information Apple wishes to seal is outdated, while other sections are already publicly available. The company particularly objects to Apple's attempt to conceal data on the rate of apps adopting external purchase links since the court's contempt order. This information is deemed vital for the ongoing proceedings and is not considered competitively sensitive, hence should not be redacted.
In conclusion, Epic requests the court to reject Apple's sealing requests, emphasizing the importance of not withholding more than 60 proposed redactions from Apple's proffer and supporting expert reports. The outcome of this dispute remains to be seen.
Written by urgent.news from 9to5Mac's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.