In a significant legal development, Apple Inc. is confronting a class action lawsuit initiated by Pure Sweat Basketball, a prominent app developer. This lawsuit emerges in the wake of a federal judge’s ruling that Apple deliberately violated a 2021 injunction designed to reform its App Store policies. The injunction aimed to grant developers greater autonomy in directing users to external payment methods, thereby circumventing Apple’s standard commission fees.
Background of the Legal Dispute
The origins of this legal battle trace back to 2020 when Epic Games, the creator of the popular game Fortnite, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple. Epic Games contended that Apple’s App Store practices constituted an illegal monopoly, primarily due to the mandatory 15% to 30% commission on in-app purchases and restrictions on alternative payment options. Although the court dismissed the monopoly claims, it issued an injunction in 2021 mandating Apple to allow developers to include links to external payment methods within their apps. This injunction became effective in January 2024.
Apple’s Response and Judicial Findings
In response to the injunction, Apple introduced a policy permitting developers to guide users to external payment options. However, the company imposed a 27% commission on transactions completed outside the App Store and implemented measures such as scare screens to deter users from utilizing third-party payment methods. These actions led U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to rule on April 30, 2025, that Apple had willfully violated the court’s order. The judge criticized Apple’s conduct, stating that the company sought to maintain a revenue stream worth billions in direct defiance of this court’s injunction. Consequently, Judge Gonzalez Rogers referred Apple and one of its executives to federal prosecutors for a potential criminal contempt investigation.
The Class Action Lawsuit
Following the judge’s ruling, Pure Sweat Basketball filed a class action lawsuit on May 5, 2025, in the Oakland, California federal court. The lawsuit represents up to 100,000 developers and alleges that Apple’s non-compliance with the injunction resulted in developers paying inflated commissions for over a year. The plaintiffs estimate that the damages amount to hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. The complaint asserts, Apple should be made to disgorge its wrongful profit, and developers are entitled to be made whole.
Implications for Developers
The lawsuit underscores the financial impact on developers who were compelled to continue paying Apple’s commissions due to the company’s alleged defiance of the court’s order. Developers argue that, had Apple complied with the injunction, they could have directed users to external payment methods, thereby avoiding the substantial commissions imposed by Apple. This case highlights the ongoing tension between app developers and platform operators over revenue-sharing models and the control exerted by tech giants over digital marketplaces.
Apple’s Position and Appeal
Apple has denied violating the court’s order and has filed a notice of appeal with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The company contends that its policies are designed to ensure the security and integrity of the App Store ecosystem. Apple maintains that its commission fees are essential for funding the operations of the App Store and supporting efforts to vet apps, thereby ensuring customer safety.
Broader Legal and Regulatory Context
This lawsuit is part of a broader wave of legal challenges Apple is facing regarding its App Store practices. In Europe, Apple has been fined €500 million for failing to comply with regulations requiring it to allow app developers to direct consumers to offers off its platform. These legal battles reflect increasing scrutiny of Apple’s business practices and the growing demand for more competitive and transparent digital marketplaces.
Conclusion
The class action lawsuit filed by Pure Sweat Basketball against Apple marks a significant escalation in the ongoing debate over App Store policies and developer rights. As the case progresses, it will likely have profound implications for the relationship between app developers and platform operators, potentially reshaping the landscape of digital commerce.
