Judicial ultimatum in Apple in USA. Apple has violated a court ruling requiring the iPhone manufacturer to allow for greater competition for applications and payment methods in its profitable App Store. After that, the new technology giant will be referred to federal prosecutors, it has decided on Wednesday federal judge in California.

US Regional Judge Ivon Gonzalez Rogers said in an 80 -page decision that Apple did not comply with the previous interim measures, which was imposed after a lawsuit for a violation of the antitrust law filed by Epic Games, a manufacturer of a successful Fortnite company.

“Apple’s ongoing attempts to intervene in competition will not be tolerated ”, The judge clarified as CNN reports. He added emphatically that “these are interim measures, not negotiation. There are no new opportunities when one side voluntarily ignores a judicial order.”

Gonzalez Rogers said she would refer Apple to federal prosecutors for investigation into the contempt for the court about her conduct.

Neither Apple nor Epic immediately responded to a request for commentary.

EPIC has accused Apple of limiting competition for application downloads and charging excessive supplies for in -app purchases.

Gonzalez Rogers in 2021 found that Apple violated a California competition law and ordered the company to allow developers more freedom to direct app users to other payment options.

Apple failed last year to persuade the US Supreme Court to annul the insurance lawsuit.

Epic Games told the Court in March 2024 that Apple was “blatantly” the court order, including imposing a new 27% fee on application developers when Apple customers are completing an app market outside the App Store. Apple charges 30% supply to the App Store purchases.

Apple also began displaying messages that warned customers of the potential risk of external links to prevent Apple payments, Epic Games argues, calling the new Apple system ” commercially useless ”.

Apple denied any offense. The American colossus, in a court test on March 7, told the judge that he has made ” extensive attempts ” to comply with interim measures ” keeping at the same time the fundamental features Apple’s business model and protecting consumers ”.

Gonzalez Rogers argued at a previous hearing that the changes that Apple made to her App Store had no other purpose “but to stifle competition”.