A US district judge has ruled that Apple violated a court order meant to enhance competition in its App Store, following an antitrust lawsuit by Epic Games. The judge, Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, emphasized that Apple's actions to interfere with competition will not be tolerated and referred the case to federal prosecutors for a criminal contempt investigation. Epic Games accused Apple of imposing excessive fees and deterring alternative payment methods, which the court had previously ordered Apple to allow. Despite Apple’s claims of compliance, the company introduced a new 27% fee on external transactions and warned users about the risks of using non-Apple payments. The judge criticized Apple's modifications to the App Store, suggesting they were intended to suppress competition rather than comply with the court's order.

US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple failed to comply with a prior injunction requiring the company to allow more competition within its App Store, as part of an antitrust lawsuit filed by Epic Games.

The court order intended to provide developers with more freedom to direct users to alternative payment options, which Apple allegedly violated by imposing a new 27% fee on developers using external payment methods.

Epic Games accused Apple of creating a commercially unusable system by displaying warnings against non-Apple payment options, further stifling competition and maintaining its high commission rates within the App Store.

Despite Apple's denial of wrongdoing and claims of extensive efforts to comply with the injunction, Judge Gonzalez Rogers suggested that Apple's changes to its App Store were primarily designed to suppress competition.

The judge's decision to refer Apple to federal prosecutors for a criminal contempt investigation highlights the seriousness of the alleged violations and underscores the ongoing tension between Apple and developers over App Store policies.

Apple had previously attempted to overturn the injunction by appealing to the US Supreme Court, but their request was denied, further complicating the legal battle with Epic Games.

The case reflects broader concerns about digital marketplaces and the balance of power between major technology companies and smaller app developers, with significant implications for future antitrust regulations.