Boox has refreshed another model in its lineup, the Boox Go 10.3, adding one new optional feature while, somewhat disappointingly, removing something users really liked. Boox Go 10.3 Gen II Boox is back at it again with the lineup refresh. This time, we're taking a look at the second-gen iteration of the Boox Go 10.3 , Boox's iPad Air -sized e-ink tablet. Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums
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 . 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 "highly prejudicial taint of being (improperly) found to have acted in contempt of the court's initial order" with the world watching, plus the case would require it to disclose confidential business information, which can't be undone. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. The mandate that will send Apple back to the district court for fee calculations goes into effect on May 5. Tags: App Store , Epic Games vs. Apple , Apple Lawsuits This article, " Apple Asks Supreme Court to Pause Epic Games Case Ahead of App Store Fee Ruling " first appeared on MacRumors.com Discuss this article in our forums
