<p>苹果今天向最高法院提交了一份紧急申请，请求在等待最高法院是否介入与 Epic Games 的法律斗争的最新进展期间，暂停 App Store 费用的计算。</p>
<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2021/05/app-store-blue-banner-epic-1.jpg?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2021/05/app-store-blue-banner-epic-1.jpg"/></p>
<p>苹果辩称，如果不暂停，将面临不可逆转的损害。苹果表示，它将不得不在全球的关注下，诉讼其商业模式的基本原则，并且将面临 “被（不当）认定为藐视法院初步命令的高度偏见”，此外，该案件还将要求其披露机密商业信息，而这些信息是无法撤回的。</p>
<blockquote>
<p>全球的监管机构正在关注此案，以确定苹果在美国以外的大市场上可能对受涵盖购买收取的佣金率。任何设定苹果可能收取的佣金的程序——这一努力本身充满挑战，并且引发法院参与不当定价的可能性——都不应在苹果因根据未提及佣金的禁令而收取佣金而被认为藐视的虚假和偏见的前提下展开。</p>
</blockquote>
<p>最高法院的裁决也可能影响案件的范围，因为苹果的一个论点是，该禁令应仅适用于 Epic Games，而不是所有在美国分发应用的开发者。</p>
<p>回顾一下，2021 年，美国加利福尼亚北区法院裁定苹果放宽其反引导规则，作为 Epic Games 诉苹果案裁决的一部分。法院要求苹果允许开发者在应用中链接到替代支付选项。苹果遵守了这一要求，但仍然收取高额费用（比其标准费用少三个百分点），导致法院裁定苹果藐视法庭，故意违反禁令。</p>
<p>在 2025 年 4 月，苹果被禁止在美国 App Store 中对应用内链接收取任何费用，苹果在同月实施了这一变化。苹果提出上诉，第九巡回上诉法院同意苹果违反了禁令，但表示该公司应能够获得其技术的补偿。上诉法院随后命令地区法院计算合理费用，而这正是苹果希望暂停的内容。</p>
<p>苹果计划挑战地区法院的藐视法庭裁决和禁令的范围，并且不希望在费用计算时进入法庭，因为最高法院有可能完全撤销该决定。</p>
<blockquote>
<p>苹果在这里寻求的只是暂停该命令，以便本法院可以在其面临可能重塑全球应用市场的发回程序之前考虑苹果的申请，而这一程序是基于苹果因民事藐视而采取的虚假前提。</p>
</blockquote>
<p>苹果请求上诉法院在听取最高法院的意见之前，暂停费用计算阶段。上诉法院最初同意，但在 Epic Games 对该决定提出挑战后改变了立场。苹果现在请求最高法院给予与上诉法院拒绝的相同的暂停。</p>
<p>苹果希望在向最高法院上诉期间保持当前的零费用链接佣金结构，这意味着美国的开发者在其应用中使用第三方支付选项进行购买时将继续不支付费用，直到案件审理结束。</p>
<p>如果最高法院批准苹果的暂停请求，零费用设置将在苹果等待最高法院的决定期间保持不变。如果最高法院不批准暂停或拒绝审理此案，苹果和 Epic Games 将返回地区法院以确定苹果可以收取的合理费用。</p>
<p>虽然苹果在准备完整的申请时请求最高法院暂停，但苹果也暗示其申请可以用作请愿书，因此我们可能很快会听到最高法院是否决定审理 Epic Games 诉苹果案。苹果将无法提交在夏季休会之前被考虑的请愿书。</p>
<p>将苹果送回地区法院进行费用计算的命令将于 5 月 5 日生效。</p>
<p>标签：App Store，Epic Games 诉苹果，苹果诉讼</p>
<p>本文《苹果请求最高法院暂停 Epic Games 案件，等待 App Store 费用裁决》首次出现在 MacRumors.com 上。</p>
<p>在我们的论坛中讨论此文章</p>

AAPX

2 倍做多 AAPL ETF - GraniteShares

<p>苹果公司已向最高法院提交紧急申请，请求暂停与其应用商店相关的费用计算，等待与 Epic Games 的法律斗争的裁决。苹果公司辩称，如果在没有暂停的情况下继续进行，将会造成不可逆转的损害，并迫使其披露机密商业信息。最高法院的裁决可能会影响案件的范围以及苹果公司可以向开发者收取的佣金率。如果获得暂停，苹果将在上诉过程中维持其对第三方支付选项的零费用结构。费用计算的强制执行将于 5 月 5 日生效</p>

<p>Apple today filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court, asking for a stay on App Store fee calculations while it waits to hear whether the Supreme Court will weigh in on the latest developments in its legal battle with Epic Games.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>苹果今天向最高法院提交了一份紧急申请，请求在等待最高法院是否介入与 Epic Games 的法律斗争的最新进展期间，暂停 App Store 费用的计算。</p>
</div><p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2021/05/app-store-blue-banner-epic-1.jpg" alt="" original-src="https://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2021/05/app-store-blue-banner-epic-1.jpg"/></p>
<p>Apple argues that without a stay, it will face irreparable harm. Apple says it will have to litigate the fundamentals of its business model with the &#34;highly prejudicial taint of being (improperly) found to have acted in contempt of the court's initial order&#34; with the world watching, plus the case would require it to disclose confidential business information, which can't be undone.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>苹果辩称，如果不暂停，将面临不可逆转的损害。苹果表示，它将不得不在全球的关注下，诉讼其商业模式的基本原则，并且将面临 “被（不当）认定为藐视法院初步命令的高度偏见”，此外，该案件还将要求其披露机密商业信息，而这些信息是无法撤回的。</p>
</div><blockquote>
<p>Regulators around the world are watching this case to determine what commission rate Apple may charge on covered purchases in huge markets outside the United States. No proceeding setting the commission Apple may charge--an endeavor that itself is fraught with challenges and raises the prospect of the courts engaging in improper rate-setting--should be allowed to unfold under the false and prejudicial auspices that Apple acted in contempt by charging a commission based on an injunction that did not even mention commissions.</p>
</blockquote>
<div class="lb-trans"><blockquote>
<p>全球的监管机构正在关注此案，以确定苹果在美国以外的大市场上可能对受涵盖购买收取的佣金率。任何设定苹果可能收取的佣金的程序——这一努力本身充满挑战，并且引发法院参与不当定价的可能性——都不应在苹果因根据未提及佣金的禁令而收取佣金而被认为藐视的虚假和偏见的前提下展开。</p>
</blockquote>
</div><p>The Supreme Court's finding could also affect the scope of the case, because one of Apple's arguments is that the injunction should only apply to ‌Epic Games‌, not all developers that distribute apps in the United States.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>最高法院的裁决也可能影响案件的范围，因为苹果的一个论点是，该禁令应仅适用于 Epic Games，而不是所有在美国分发应用的开发者。</p>
</div><p>For a recap, in 2021, the U.S. Northern District Court of California ordered Apple to relax its anti-steering rules as part of the ruling in the ‌Epic Games‌ v. Apple case. Apple was told to allow developers to link to alternate payment options in apps. Apple complied, but still charged high fees (three percent less than its standard fees), leading the court to find Apple in contempt of court for willfully violating the injunction.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>回顾一下，2021 年，美国加利福尼亚北区法院裁定苹果放宽其反引导规则，作为 Epic Games 诉苹果案裁决的一部分。法院要求苹果允许开发者在应用中链接到替代支付选项。苹果遵守了这一要求，但仍然收取高额费用（比其标准费用少三个百分点），导致法院裁定苹果藐视法庭，故意违反禁令。</p>
</div><p>In April 2025, Apple was barred from collecting any fees on links in apps in the U.S. ‌App Store‌, a change Apple implemented the same month. Apple appealed, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed Apple violated the injunction, but said the company should be able to receive compensation for its technology. The appeals court then ordered the district court to calculate a reasonable fee, and that's what Apple wants to pause.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在 2025 年 4 月，苹果被禁止在美国 App Store 中对应用内链接收取任何费用，苹果在同月实施了这一变化。苹果提出上诉，第九巡回上诉法院同意苹果违反了禁令，但表示该公司应能够获得其技术的补偿。上诉法院随后命令地区法院计算合理费用，而这正是苹果希望暂停的内容。</p>
</div><p>Apple is planning to challenge the district court's contempt of court ruling and the scope of the injunction, and it does not want to go to court for fee calculations when there's a chance the Supreme Court could vacate the decision entirely.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>苹果计划挑战地区法院的藐视法庭裁决和禁令的范围，并且不希望在费用计算时进入法庭，因为最高法院有可能完全撤销该决定。</p>
</div><blockquote>
<p>All Apple seeks here is a stay of the mandate so this Court can consider Apple's petition before it is subjected to a remand proceeding that could reshape the global app market based on the false premise that Apple engaged in civil contempt.</p>
</blockquote>
<div class="lb-trans"><blockquote>
<p>苹果在这里寻求的只是暂停该命令，以便本法院可以在其面临可能重塑全球应用市场的发回程序之前考虑苹果的申请，而这一程序是基于苹果因民事藐视而采取的虚假前提。</p>
</blockquote>
</div><p>Apple asked the appeals court to stay the fee calculation phase until it heard back from the Supreme Court. The appeals court agreed initially, but then reversed course after ‌Epic Games‌ challenged the decision. Apple is now asking the Supreme Court for the same stay that the appeals court denied.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>苹果请求上诉法院在听取最高法院的意见之前，暂停费用计算阶段。上诉法院最初同意，但在 Epic Games 对该决定提出挑战后改变了立场。苹果现在请求最高法院给予与上诉法院拒绝的相同的暂停。</p>
</div><p>Apple wants to keep its current zero-fee link-out commission structure in place while it appeals to the Supreme Court, which means developers in the U.S. would continue to pay no fees for purchases made using third-party payment options in their apps while the case plays out.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>苹果希望在向最高法院上诉期间保持当前的零费用链接佣金结构，这意味着美国的开发者在其应用中使用第三方支付选项进行购买时将继续不支付费用，直到案件审理结束。</p>
</div><p>If the Supreme Court grants Apple's request for a stay, the zero-fee setup will remain in place while Apple waits on a decision from the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court does not grant the stay or declines to hear the case, Apple and ‌Epic Games‌ will return to the district court to determine the reasonable fee that Apple can collect.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>如果最高法院批准苹果的暂停请求，零费用设置将在苹果等待最高法院的决定期间保持不变。如果最高法院不批准暂停或拒绝审理此案，苹果和 Epic Games 将返回地区法院以确定苹果可以收取的合理费用。</p>
</div><p>While Apple is asking the Supreme Court for a stay as it prepares a full filing, Apple has also suggested that its filing could be used as a certiorari petition, so we could soon hear whether the Supreme Court will decide to hear the ‌Epic Games‌ v. Apple case. Apple will not be able to submit a petition for certiorari that will be considered before the summer recess.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>虽然苹果在准备完整的申请时请求最高法院暂停，但苹果也暗示其申请可以用作请愿书，因此我们可能很快会听到最高法院是否决定审理 Epic Games 诉苹果案。苹果将无法提交在夏季休会之前被考虑的请愿书。</p>
</div><p>The mandate that will send Apple back to the district court for fee calculations goes into effect on May 5.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>将苹果送回地区法院进行费用计算的命令将于 5 月 5 日生效。</p>
</div><p>Tags: App Store, Epic Games vs. Apple, Apple Lawsuits</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>标签：App Store，Epic Games 诉苹果，苹果诉讼</p>
</div><p>This article, &#34;Apple Asks Supreme Court to Pause Epic Games Case Ahead of App Store Fee Ruling&#34; first appeared on MacRumors.com</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>本文《苹果请求最高法院暂停 Epic Games 案件，等待 App Store 费用裁决》首次出现在 MacRumors.com 上。</p>
</div><p>Discuss this article in our forums</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在我们的论坛中讨论此文章</p>
</div>

苹果公司请求最高法院在应用商店费用裁决之前暂停 Epic Games 案件