CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision to accept commitments on 11 July 2024; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Outline European Commission Article 102 TFEU investigation into whether Apple abused its dominant position in markets for mobile wallets on iOS devices (AT.40452) Latest development On 11 July 2024, the Commission accepted commitments from Apple (see details below), and therefore closed its investigation.In parallel to the above commitments decision, the Commission also adopted a second decision closing its investigation into online restrictions and alleged refusals of access to Apple Pay for specific products of rivals that the Commission also opened in June 2020. This second decision also closed all proceedings in relation to the UK, which no longer forms part of the EEA. Parties • Apple Inc (Apple): Apple is a US based company. It designs, manufactures, and markets personal computers and related personal computing and mobile communication devices along with a variety of related software, services,

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 22 November 2024; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Outline European Commission Article 101 TFEU and/or Article 102 TFEU investigation into Apple Inc’s App Store rules and their impact on competition in music streaming and e-books/audiobooks (AT.40652). Latest development On 22 November 2024, the Commission closed its investigation following the withdrawal of the complaint filed against Apple by an e-book and audiobook distributor. Parties • Apple Inc (Apple); Apple is a US based company. It designs, manufactures, and markets personal computers and related personal computing and mobile

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this cae hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 4 March 2024; it is longer maintained. See further, timeline, related cases and commentary. Case facts Outline European Commission Article 102 TFEU investigation into Apple’s App Store rules and their impact on competition in music streaming (AT.40437). Latest development On 4 March 2024, the Commission issued its infringement decision and imposed a fine of over €1.8bn for abusing its dominant position in the market for the distribution of music streaming apps to iPhone and iPad users (iOS users) through its App Store. In particular, the Commission found that Apple applied restrictions on app developers preventing them from informing iOS users about alternative and cheaper music subscription services available outside of the app. Parties • Apple Inc (Apple); Apple is a US based company. It designs, manufactures, and markets personal computers and related personal computing and mobile communication devices along with a variety of related software, services, peripherals, and networking solutions. Apple sells its products worldwide through its online stores,

Law360: European authorities provisionally accused Apple's App Store of violating its new digital antitrust law designed to curtail the power of Big Tech, claiming the iPhone maker's guidelines unfairly prevent developers from steering consumers to alternative platforms.

MLex: A total of 34 companies and associations, including Spotify, Schibsted and Proton, have written to the European Commission, expressing concern over Apple's plans to comply with new EU tech legislation regulating ‘gatekeeper’ digital platforms, the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Apple's alternative fees and commissions for app developers are ‘manifestly not compliant,’ they said.

Law360: The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) refused on 12 April 2024 to toss a £785m proposed class action by app developers against Apple over commission payments after finding that the claimants had a real shot at showing that the case was governed by UK law.

Law360, London: The European Court of Justice (ECJ)’s ruling against Apple and Ireland last week runs contrary to its logic in a 2022 State aid ruling, potentially giving the European Commission a reason to think it can decide tax norms across Europe, tax experts said.

MLex: Apple believes age checks aren’t needed for most apps, so its App Store should not conduct blanket age verification, the company said in a white paper today. As age assurance and minor safety become an increasingly hot topic for lawmakers all over the world, the question in the EU of who is responsible for keeping minors away from harmful content is yet to be determined: Meta has been advocating for age verification on the operating system level, while Apple thinks it should be in place only for some apps.

MLex: Apple has said it will revise the App Store fees for iPhone apps in the EU, as it set out plans to comply with the EU’s new laws for ‘gatekeeper’ digital platforms. The company will also allow alternative app stores on devices and roll out a choice screen for rival browsers.

IP analysis: On 25 November 2021, Mr Justice Meade handed down the latest judgment in the Optis v Apple SEP/FRAND litigation, ruling that each of the three patents asserted by Optis were invalid for obviousness. Apple had conceded at the PTR that the patents were essential, so that the only issue for trial was validity. This technical trial, termed 'Trial C', comes in the context of another recent success for Apple in the wider Optis v Apple proceedings, in which the Court of Appeal overturned Mr Justice Birss' High Court ruling on essentiality. This Trial C saw Meade J consider technical arguments on some of the patents in the proceedings, having already handed down a judgment finding Apple to be an 'unwilling licensee' in September last year. The FRAND trial is scheduled to take place in summer 2022 after further technical trials. Written by Neville Cordell, partner, and Sian Avery, associate, at Allen & Overy LLP.

Law360: Apple has won permission to appeal a decision to let an £853m (US$1bn) class action claim go ahead for allegations the tech giant concealed problems with iPhone batteries, despite challenges to the funding arrangements.

The European Commission has mandated that Apple ensure its iPad Operating System (iPadOS) complies with the obligations of the EU Digital Markets Act (DMA), following its inclusion on the list of core platform services in April 2024. This includes allowing users to select their default web browser, enabling alternative app stores, and ensuring that accessory devices can access iPadOS features. On 1 November 2024, Apple also published a compliance report outlining the measures it has taken for iPadOS to comply with the EU DMA, which will be evaluated by the Commission alongside stakeholder input. Should the Commission conclude Apple's solutions are non-compliant, it can take formal enforcement action under the EU DMA.