Apple lied under oath and must comply with the ruling
Across the Pacific, another court has weighed the question of who holds the keys to the digital marketplace — and again found that Apple's grip may have exceeded what competition law permits. An Australian judge ruled this month that both Apple and Google misused their market power by expelling Epic Games and restricting how users could pay and install software, ordering Fortnite's return to Australian iPhones. The decision is not an ending but a waypoint in a sprawling, country-by-country reckoning with the boundaries of platform control — a question that touches every developer, every consumer, and every device in the connected world.
- An Australian court has ruled that Apple and Google violated competition law, finding their bans on Epic Games substantially lessened competition in their own app stores.
- The ruling lands as part of a global pattern: Epic has now won meaningful rulings in both the US and Australia, yet Fortnite still cannot return to the UK App Store, and Apple is contesting outcomes in every jurisdiction.
- Apple's US legal troubles deepened when a federal judge found the company had defied a court order and potentially lied under oath — a referral for criminal investigation that raised the stakes far beyond app store fees.
- Fortnite's return to the US App Store in May made it the top free game almost immediately, signaling that consumer demand was never the issue — only the gatekeeping.
- Apple insists it 'strongly disagrees' with parts of the Australian ruling and shows no sign of standing down, framing each jurisdiction as a new front in a fight it intends to win somewhere.
Fortnite is returning to iPhones in Australia after an Australian judge ruled this month that both Apple and Google violated competition law by removing Epic Games' battle royale from their platforms. The game will come back through Epic's own store, marking another milestone in a years-long conflict over who controls the digital storefronts through which billions of people access software.
The dispute began when Epic deliberately bypassed Apple's 30 percent commission by inserting its own payment system — a calculated provocation that led Apple to ban the game entirely. What followed was litigation that has now spread across multiple countries with remarkably consistent results. In the United States, a federal judge ruled in May that Apple must allow developers to process payments outside its system; when Apple continued collecting its commission anyway, the judge found the company had defied the court and referred the matter for criminal investigation. Fortnite returned to the US App Store and immediately topped the free games chart.
In Australia, Judge Jonathan Beach found that Apple and Google had misused their market dominance by blocking sideloading and alternative payment methods. Apple's security justifications did not persuade him. Epic celebrated the ruling and announced its games store would also return to Australian devices. Apple acknowledged the court's rejection of some of Epic's claims while stating it strongly disagreed with other parts of the decision.
Yet the war continues. Fortnite has not returned to the UK App Store, and Apple has signaled it will contest rulings wherever they arise. What is becoming clear is that this conflict will be resolved — if it is resolved — jurisdiction by jurisdiction, in a prolonged legal campaign with no certain outcome in sight.
Fortnite is coming back to iPhones in Australia. An Australian judge ruled this month that Apple and Google both violated competition law when they removed Epic Games' battle royale from their app stores, and now the game will return to iOS in the country through Epic's own store.
The ruling marks another victory for Epic in its years-long fight against Apple's control of the App Store, though the war is far from over. The company was originally banned after it tried to sneak in its own payment system, deliberately circumventing Apple's 30 percent commission on in-app purchases. It was a calculated breach of the rules, and Apple responded by kicking Epic out entirely.
What followed was a legal battle that has now played out across multiple countries with strikingly similar outcomes. In the United States, a federal judge ruled in May that while Apple mostly won its case, the company must allow developers to process payments through their own systems without Apple taking a cut. When Apple ignored that ruling and continued demanding its commission anyway, the judge found the company had lied under oath and referred the matter for criminal investigation. Fortnite returned to the US App Store and immediately became the top free game, though Apple has vowed to keep fighting.
The Australian case followed a parallel path. Judge Jonathan Beach found that both Apple and Google had misused their market dominance by banning Epic and preventing users from sideloading apps or using alternative payment methods. Apple's argument that these restrictions were necessary for security didn't persuade him. The ruling was direct: the companies had engaged in conduct that substantially lessened competition in their respective app stores.
Epic celebrated the decision, announcing that Fortnite and its games store would return to Australian iPhones. Apple responded with a statement saying it "strongly disagreed" with parts of the ruling, though it acknowledged the court's rejection of some of Epic's claims.
But this is not a final victory for Epic. The company has not yet succeeded in returning Fortnite to the UK App Store, and Apple continues to fight the US case. What's becoming clear is that this dispute will be settled country by country, with both tech giants prepared for a prolonged legal campaign across multiple jurisdictions. The outcome in any given place remains uncertain, and Apple's commitment to continuing the fight suggests these battles are nowhere near finished.
Citas Notables
Apple had engaged in conduct that had the purpose or is likely to have or had the effect of substantially lessening competition in such markets— Australian Judge Jonathan Beach
We strongly disagree with the court's ruling on others— Apple's statement on the Australian decision
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did Epic Games think it could just bypass Apple's payment system in the first place?
Because the 30 percent cut was enormous, and Epic believed it had leverage—a hugely popular game that users wanted. They were willing to break the rules to test whether Apple could actually enforce them.
And the judge found Apple lied under oath?
Yes. After the initial ruling, Apple said it would comply but then kept demanding its commission on outside payments anyway. The judge caught them in it and referred the matter for criminal investigation.
So why is Fortnite's return to the US App Store potentially temporary?
Because Apple hasn't stopped fighting. They're appealing, they're arguing in other countries, and they're clearly betting they can outlast Epic in court. One ruling doesn't mean the war is over.
What does the Australian ruling actually change for users?
It means Australians can now download Fortnite directly from Epic's store on their iPhones, and developers there can use payment methods other than Apple's. It's a crack in Apple's walled garden, but only in Australia—for now.
Is this the beginning of the end for Apple's app store model?
Not necessarily. Apple is fighting hard in every jurisdiction, and they have resources Epic doesn't. This could drag on for years, country by country.