Epic Games vs Apple Case

Order byBest matchMost fresh

Epic Games says Fortnite

Fortnite Returns to Apple’s App Store After Scoring a Legal Victory

Apple restored the popular game Fortnite to the App Store in the United States on Tuesday, nearly five years after it was kicked out of the store and its developer sued the tech giant in an antitrust...

Agence France-Presse on MSN · 1d

Epic Games says Fortnite back on Apple's US App Store

· 6d · on MSN

Epic Games: 'Fortnite' is offline for Apple devices worldwide after app store rejection [updated]

· 1d

Fortnite video game returns to iPhone app store in U.S., ending exile imposed by Apple

Fortnite has returned to the iPhone app store in the U.S., ending a prolonged exile that was triggered by a legal showdown over the lucrative fees that Apple had been collecting for years through a p...

· 1d

Fortnite is back on the App Store in the US

· 1d

Fortnite Returns to U.S. App Store

· 1d

Epic Games’ Fortnite back up on Apple app store in US after nearly 5 years

Fortnite launched in 2017 and became an instant hit, drawing millions of players around the world thanks to its last-player-standing, “battle royale” format.

· 1d

Fortnite is back on Apple's App Store in U.S. after nearly 5 years

GameInformer · 1d

Fortnite Is Back On The iOS App Store In The US After Nearly 5 Years

Microsoft Files Legal Motion Against Apple in Epic Games Case

In a new legal filing in Epic v. Apple, Microsoft revealed why it hasn't yet released its mobile game store on the iPhone.

20hon MSN

A Judge Blocked Apple From Collecting These Commissions

Apple recently lost a major antitrust case to Epic Games that has forced the tech giant to substantially change its iOS, Apple's operating system used by

Macworld on MSN2d

Apple could be in serious trouble over Fortnite rejection

The problem is that Apple is specifically not allowed to “prohibit” the use of external payment links. It can reject apps, or ban developer accounts, at its own discretion. But if it rejects an app or bans a dev for no reason other than its use of such links, does that amount to a de facto prohibition? Again, that’s debatable.