Apple has responded sharply to Epic Games’ latest legal filing, accusing the Fortnite creator of “seeking a free ride” as the long-running antitrust dispute between the two companies continues. The case, now in a new appellate phase, centers around how developers can direct users to alternative payment methods outside Apple’s App Store system.
According to 9to5Mac’s report, Apple argued that Epic is attempting to bypass App Store fees while still enjoying the benefits of Apple’s ecosystem and distribution reach. The filing comes as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to decide whether the lower court’s injunction – which would allow developers to link to external payment options – should remain in effect or be suspended pending appeal.
This legal confrontation dates back to 2020, when Epic deliberately violated App Store policies by introducing its own in-app payment system in Fortnite. Apple responded by removing Fortnite from the App Store, setting off a years-long battle that has shaped global discussions about digital marketplaces and fair competition. Epic maintains that Apple’s 30% commission and restrictions on alternative payments are anticompetitive, while Apple argues that its fees reflect the value and security provided to developers and users alike.
Earlier this year, the Epic Games Store received approval in the EU under the Digital Markets Act, signaling a shift in how regional regulators are handling Apple’s dominance over iOS app distribution. In contrast, U.S. courts have been slower to impose similar changes, though developers continue to pressure Apple through multiple legal and public campaigns. Even major tech communities like Y Combinator have voiced support for Epic’s stance against Apple’s closed ecosystem, arguing that more openness would encourage innovation across platforms.
Apple’s latest filing accuses Epic of “wanting all the advantages of the App Store without paying anything for them.” The company insists that its platform offers app discovery, security, and user trust that directly benefit developers, making its fees justified. Epic, meanwhile, continues to argue that Apple’s control over iOS app distribution harms competition and consumer choice, a position it has reiterated in ongoing global appeals.
In some markets, Epic has attempted to bring Fortnite back to iOS under regional laws that force Apple to relax its restrictions. For instance, Fortnite’s return to the Australian App Store illustrated how legal frameworks outside the U.S. could reshape Apple’s approach to developer access and payments. Still, the company remains firm in defending its tightly managed platform model, warning that unchecked sideloading or third-party stores could compromise security.
The upcoming Supreme Court ruling will be one of the most closely watched decisions in the tech industry this year. If the injunction is upheld, Apple may be forced to allow external payment links in the U.S., mirroring policy shifts already underway in the EU. Such a ruling could redefine the financial dynamics between Apple and developers, opening new opportunities for app monetization beyond Apple’s established ecosystem.
For now, both sides appear entrenched. Apple is determined to protect the App Store’s integrated model, while Epic is equally committed to breaking what it sees as an unfair monopoly. The court’s verdict could not only determine the future of Fortnite on iOS but also influence how every developer does business across Apple’s platforms.
