Not great legal news for Apple. For starters, a judge has concluded that Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, will have to make a statement for seven hours in the upcoming case against Epic Games. Second, Apple’s attempt to sue Samsung in the case has also been rejected. Womp womp.
According to court documentsEpic Games wanted to impeach Cook for a suggested eight hours. Apple then tried it apex doctrine, which, in a nutshell, prevents a high-level company employee from being dismissed. Or, you know, zero hours. Apple later offered a four-hour concession. However, according to Judge Thomas S. Hixon, this dispute is less than it appears at first sight. Hixon writes that the top teacher “limits the length of a deposit, rather than blocking it altogether,” and that given the circumstances, the question is whether Cook should be deposed for “four hours, eight hours, or some length of time in between.” Hence Hixon’s statement that Cook should be impeached for seven hours.
As for where Hixon got seven hours from, the judge writes that this is the standard rule for “how long a witness must suffer to be impeached.” Hixon also argues that the top teacher focuses on whether a witness has a “unique, non-repetitive knowledge of the facts of the case.” When it comes to Apple’s app store policies – which are at the heart of this seemingly never-ending case against Epic – Hixon writes: to its business model. ”
On the bright side for Cook, Judge Hixon said that a “impeachment of more than seven hours is not justified.”
G / O Media can receive a commission
Another blow is that Judge Hixon rejected Apple’s request to subpoena Samsung internal documents. Since Samsung isn’t even involved in Apple’s and Epic’s beef, Hixon characterized the request as “a quirky deep dive” into Samsung’s relationship with Epic. As for why Apple made the request in the first place, the company claimed those documents would prove that the App Store’s practices are much the same as everyone else’s. Or simply put, from Apple’s point of view, Epic Games cannot make a compelling antitrust argument if it can prove that Samsung made similar decisions in distributing Epic’s Fortnite.
However, Hixon claims that because Epic Games is a Pretty Big Company regardless of the arrangement it has with Samsung is unique and “cannot serve as a stand-in for a wider category of market participants. ”
It’s hard to say that these two statements are “wins” for Epic, just as they are minor setbacks for Apple. Cook could very well be impeached for seven hours, but that doesn’t guarantee the court will side with Epic Games at the end of the day. However, Samsung’s denial may bodes badly for Apple’s other subpoenas for other third parties, including Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and Amazon.
In any case, these are just the latest developments in the litany of legal tit-for-tat in between Apple and Epic Games since last summer. A sequel in court, you could say, of the ridiculous showmanship which started this whole saga in the first place. As a refresher, Epic introduced direct in-app purchases in August Fortnite that bypassed Apple’s 30% commission for transactions through the App Store. That led to Apple Startup Fortnite from the App Store. That in turn led to a spicy video from Epic depicting Apple as a dystopian dictator. Which led to Apple again termination of Epic Games’ App Store developer account.
The drama has toned down a bit as the trial doesn’t begin until July. That said, it’s fair to assume that there will still be plenty of passive-aggressive legal back and forth in the coming months as both Epic and Apple seek to reap benefits for their individual cases.