<p>蘋果今天向最高法院提交了一份緊急申請，請求在等待最高法院是否介入與 Epic Games 的法律鬥爭的最新進展期間，暫停 App Store 費用的計算。</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>蘋果辯稱，如果不暫停，將面臨不可逆轉的損害。蘋果表示，它將不得不在全球的關注下，訴訟其商業模式的基本原則，並且將面臨 “被（不當）認定為藐視法院初步命令的高度偏見”，此外，該案件還將要求其披露機密商業信息，而這些信息是無法撤回的。</p>
<blockquote>
<p>全球的監管機構正在關注此案，以確定蘋果在美國以外的大市場上可能對受涵蓋購買收取的佣金率。任何設定蘋果可能收取的佣金的程序——這一努力本身充滿挑戰，並且引發法院參與不當定價的可能性——都不應在蘋果因根據未提及佣金的禁令而收取佣金而被認為藐視的虛假和偏見的前提下展開。</p>
</blockquote>
<p>最高法院的裁決也可能影響案件的範圍，因為蘋果的一個論點是，該禁令應僅適用於 Epic Games，而不是所有在美國分發應用的開發者。</p>
<p>回顧一下，2021 年，美國加利福尼亞北區法院裁定蘋果放寬其反引導規則，作為 Epic Games 訴蘋果案裁決的一部分。法院要求蘋果允許開發者在應用中鏈接到替代支付選項。蘋果遵守了這一要求，但仍然收取高額費用（比其標準費用少三個百分點），導致法院裁定蘋果藐視法庭，故意違反禁令。</p>
<p>在 2025 年 4 月，蘋果被禁止在美國 App Store 中對應用內鏈接收取任何費用，蘋果在同月實施了這一變化。蘋果提出上訴，第九巡迴上訴法院同意蘋果違反了禁令，但表示該公司應能夠獲得其技術的補償。上訴法院隨後命令地區法院計算合理費用，而這正是蘋果希望暫停的內容。</p>
<p>蘋果計劃挑戰地區法院的藐視法庭裁決和禁令的範圍，並且不希望在費用計算時進入法庭，因為最高法院有可能完全撤銷該決定。</p>
<blockquote>
<p>蘋果在這裏尋求的只是暫停該命令，以便本法院可以在其面臨可能重塑全球應用市場的發回程序之前考慮蘋果的申請，而這一程序是基於蘋果因民事藐視而採取的虛假前提。</p>
</blockquote>
<p>蘋果請求上訴法院在聽取最高法院的意見之前，暫停費用計算階段。上訴法院最初同意，但在 Epic Games 對該決定提出挑戰後改變了立場。蘋果現在請求最高法院給予與上訴法院拒絕的相同的暫停。</p>
<p>蘋果希望在向最高法院上訴期間保持當前的零費用鏈接佣金結構，這意味着美國的開發者在其應用中使用第三方支付選項進行購買時將繼續不支付費用，直到案件審理結束。</p>
<p>如果最高法院批准蘋果的暫停請求，零費用設置將在蘋果等待最高法院的決定期間保持不變。如果最高法院不批准暫停或拒絕審理此案，蘋果和 Epic Games 將返回地區法院以確定蘋果可以收取的合理費用。</p>
<p>雖然蘋果在準備完整的申請時請求最高法院暫停，但蘋果也暗示其申請可以用作請願書，因此我們可能很快會聽到最高法院是否決定審理 Epic Games 訴蘋果案。蘋果將無法提交在夏季休會之前被考慮的請願書。</p>
<p>將蘋果送回地區法院進行費用計算的命令將於 5 月 5 日生效。</p>
<p>標籤：App Store，Epic Games 訴蘋果，蘋果訴訟</p>
<p>本文《蘋果請求最高法院暫停 Epic Games 案件，等待 App Store 費用裁決》首次出現在 MacRumors.com 上。</p>
<p>在我們的論壇中討論此文章</p>

AAPX

2 倍做多 AAPL ETF - GraniteShares

<p>蘋果公司已向最高法院提交緊急申請，請求暫停與其應用商店相關的費用計算，等待與 Epic Games 的法律鬥爭的裁決。蘋果公司辯稱，如果在沒有暫停的情況下繼續進行，將會造成不可逆轉的損害，並迫使其披露機密商業信息。最高法院的裁決可能會影響案件的範圍以及蘋果公司可以向開發者收取的佣金率。如果獲得暫停，蘋果將在上訴過程中維持其對第三方支付選項的零費用結構。費用計算的強制執行將於 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>蘋果今天向最高法院提交了一份緊急申請，請求在等待最高法院是否介入與 Epic Games 的法律鬥爭的最新進展期間，暫停 App Store 費用的計算。</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>蘋果辯稱，如果不暫停，將面臨不可逆轉的損害。蘋果表示，它將不得不在全球的關注下，訴訟其商業模式的基本原則，並且將面臨 “被（不當）認定為藐視法院初步命令的高度偏見”，此外，該案件還將要求其披露機密商業信息，而這些信息是無法撤回的。</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>全球的監管機構正在關注此案，以確定蘋果在美國以外的大市場上可能對受涵蓋購買收取的佣金率。任何設定蘋果可能收取的佣金的程序——這一努力本身充滿挑戰，並且引發法院參與不當定價的可能性——都不應在蘋果因根據未提及佣金的禁令而收取佣金而被認為藐視的虛假和偏見的前提下展開。</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>最高法院的裁決也可能影響案件的範圍，因為蘋果的一個論點是，該禁令應僅適用於 Epic Games，而不是所有在美國分發應用的開發者。</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>回顧一下，2021 年，美國加利福尼亞北區法院裁定蘋果放寬其反引導規則，作為 Epic Games 訴蘋果案裁決的一部分。法院要求蘋果允許開發者在應用中鏈接到替代支付選項。蘋果遵守了這一要求，但仍然收取高額費用（比其標準費用少三個百分點），導致法院裁定蘋果藐視法庭，故意違反禁令。</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，蘋果被禁止在美國 App Store 中對應用內鏈接收取任何費用，蘋果在同月實施了這一變化。蘋果提出上訴，第九巡迴上訴法院同意蘋果違反了禁令，但表示該公司應能夠獲得其技術的補償。上訴法院隨後命令地區法院計算合理費用，而這正是蘋果希望暫停的內容。</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>蘋果計劃挑戰地區法院的藐視法庭裁決和禁令的範圍，並且不希望在費用計算時進入法庭，因為最高法院有可能完全撤銷該決定。</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>蘋果在這裏尋求的只是暫停該命令，以便本法院可以在其面臨可能重塑全球應用市場的發回程序之前考慮蘋果的申請，而這一程序是基於蘋果因民事藐視而採取的虛假前提。</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>蘋果請求上訴法院在聽取最高法院的意見之前，暫停費用計算階段。上訴法院最初同意，但在 Epic Games 對該決定提出挑戰後改變了立場。蘋果現在請求最高法院給予與上訴法院拒絕的相同的暫停。</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>蘋果希望在向最高法院上訴期間保持當前的零費用鏈接佣金結構，這意味着美國的開發者在其應用中使用第三方支付選項進行購買時將繼續不支付費用，直到案件審理結束。</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>如果最高法院批准蘋果的暫停請求，零費用設置將在蘋果等待最高法院的決定期間保持不變。如果最高法院不批准暫停或拒絕審理此案，蘋果和 Epic Games 將返回地區法院以確定蘋果可以收取的合理費用。</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>雖然蘋果在準備完整的申請時請求最高法院暫停，但蘋果也暗示其申請可以用作請願書，因此我們可能很快會聽到最高法院是否決定審理 Epic Games 訴蘋果案。蘋果將無法提交在夏季休會之前被考慮的請願書。</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>將蘋果送回地區法院進行費用計算的命令將於 5 月 5 日生效。</p>
</div><p>Tags: App Store, Epic Games vs. Apple, Apple Lawsuits</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>標籤：App Store，Epic Games 訴蘋果，蘋果訴訟</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《蘋果請求最高法院暫停 Epic Games 案件，等待 App Store 費用裁決》首次出現在 MacRumors.com 上。</p>
</div><p>Discuss this article in our forums</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在我們的論壇中討論此文章</p>
</div>

蘋果公司請求最高法院在應用商店費用裁決之前暫停 Epic Games 案件