Apple and Epic Are Still Fighting Over the App Store Fee Math
An October 9 joint status report in the Apple-Epic dispute records a disagreement over Apple’s production of documents concerning proposed commissions on purchases made through external links. 9to5Mac reported on the filing October 12. The report captures the parties’ competing accounts; it is not a decision on the fees or a finding about which account of the document search is correct.
Two accounts of the document search
Epic says Apple’s document production is inadequate and asks the court to set a November 1 deadline for production. That is Epic’s request, not a deadline the court has ordered. Apple disputes Epic’s characterization. According to Apple’s account, it agreed to broaden its searches and expects to make a substantial production later. The filing does not establish either party’s description as the definitive account, and it does not provide a specific later completion date.
The parties do agree on one procedural point: Epic’s 60-day response period has not yet begun. That does not mean the commission dispute has been resolved or that the court has accepted either side’s position on the documents. It means the report describes an ongoing process, with the timing of the response period still ahead. The filing is a progress update, not a ruling wearing a tiny judge’s robe.
Why the paperwork reaches users
Records about how a platform sets fees can help clarify the rules developers must navigate when they offer ways to buy outside an app store. Those rules may affect which options developers choose to offer and, in turn, which choices users see. That is a reason the underlying documents matter. It is not proof that developers will pass a particular fee on to customers, or that prices will change.
The immediate question in this report is narrower than the larger fight over app distribution and payments: what documents Apple will produce about the proposed external-link commissions, and when. Developers have an interest in understanding the terms of doing business on a major platform. Users have an interest in knowing what purchase routes are available and what rules shape them. Neither point tells us what the documents will show; the filing itself does not answer that.
For now, the useful takeaway is modest. Epic wants a November 1 production deadline. Apple disputes Epic’s account, says it agreed to broaden its searches, and expects substantial production later. The parties say Epic’s 60-day response clock has not started. The proposed commissions remain undecided in this update, as does the dispute over the paperwork. The corporate maze is still open, now with two sets of annotations and no final map.