Apple tries last-minute appeal to stop App Store changes
Apple is petitioning a higher court to stay the previous ruling that mandates changes to the App Store as a result of the legal battle with Epic Games.
Apple is making another attempt to delay implementing changes to its App Store while waiting for the appeals hearing.
Apple's argument remains the same. The tech-giant claims that integrating new App Store affordances is a monumental task that would take "months" to accomplish and be detrimental to everyone involved.
Apple hopes that it can delay the injunction 30 days.
"Given the injunction's effective date of Dec. 9, Apple seeks immediate entry of an administrative stay that would expire 30 days after the Court's ruling on the stay motion," according to the filing seen by Bloomberg.
Without a stay, Apple said that "the App Store will have to be reconfigured -- to the detriment of consumers, developers, and Apple itself."
On November 9, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected Apple's first motion to stay court orders that would force the company to repeal App Store anti-steering rules prohibiting developers from integrating purchase buttons and links within their apps.
The request was denied, with the judge saying that Apple had sufficient time since the ruling to get the job done.
Read on AppleInsider
Apple is making another attempt to delay implementing changes to its App Store while waiting for the appeals hearing.
Apple's argument remains the same. The tech-giant claims that integrating new App Store affordances is a monumental task that would take "months" to accomplish and be detrimental to everyone involved.
Apple hopes that it can delay the injunction 30 days.
"Given the injunction's effective date of Dec. 9, Apple seeks immediate entry of an administrative stay that would expire 30 days after the Court's ruling on the stay motion," according to the filing seen by Bloomberg.
Without a stay, Apple said that "the App Store will have to be reconfigured -- to the detriment of consumers, developers, and Apple itself."
On November 9, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected Apple's first motion to stay court orders that would force the company to repeal App Store anti-steering rules prohibiting developers from integrating purchase buttons and links within their apps.
The request was denied, with the judge saying that Apple had sufficient time since the ruling to get the job done.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
As for lawsuits against Apple for changing things - that is DOA because Apple would be compiling with a court ruling. I seriously doubt any judge would tolerate any such lawsuit and likely give a summary judgment so fast it would make the plaintiffs' heads spin like a top. If they were really ticked off at the plaintiffs' they could have them pay Apple's legal fees on top of everything else.
...Well, let's just say I don't like to jump to do the "you're deliberately stirring the pot" or "you're a shill" conclusions, but his and a small few others' comments are just so outrageous (both ridiculous and just plain wrong), and when challenged with any actual facts, they disappear on the topic, and have no response (until they pop up somewhere else with something new)...
I just don't know how to come to any other conclusions. I'm happy to hear it's not just me with these thoughts.
One wonders why. I suppose it's a form of entertainment for some people. Mind you, at least as I've come to increasingly conclude the above about these guys, it becomes less annoying and more entertaining for me too. So I suppose... win win! lol.