Apple

Spotify and other music apps compete with Apple Music but must use Apple's App Store to reach iPhone users. Europe says Apple used its control of that store to block apps from telling you about cheaper prices on the web and to favor its own music service. Apple was fined, but arguments over App Store changes are still playing out.

Outcome: Commission fined Apple €1.84 billion in 2024 for music streaming-related abuses; DMA gatekeeper obligations and compliance monitoring continue.

Epic Games, maker of Fortnite, deliberately broke Apple's App Store payment rules and sued, hoping to force Apple to allow other payment methods and app stores on iPhones. Apple mostly won: courts said Epic did not prove Apple is an illegal monopolist under federal law. Epic did get a limited win allowing apps to mention external payment options under California state law.

Outcome: Most federal antitrust claims failed; Apple won on core Sherman Act theories. A narrow California unfair-competition injunction allowed some external payment links. The Supreme Court declined further review in 2024. In April 2025 the district court found Apple had not complied with that injunction.

Europe's Digital Markets Act tells the biggest tech platforms—gatekeepers like Apple and Google—what they must do up front: choice screens, alternative app stores, fair messaging links, and more. Early compliance updates drew complaints that new fees and scary pop-ups discourage real competition. EU regulators opened investigations, but no final penalties have been decided—this is an ongoing regulatory story, not a finished court case.

Outcome: The Commission has issued DMA non-compliance decisions, including Apple's €500 million steering fine and Meta's €200 million pay-or-consent fine in April 2025. On 8 July 2026 the General Court dismissed Apple's challenge to its App Store and iOS gatekeeper designation. Other DMA files remain open.

Europe's Digital Markets Act requires Apple to let EU users and developers use alternative app stores and payment links. In April 2025 the Commission fined Apple €500 million for anti-steering. A second probe into Apple's new App Store business terms is still open.

Outcome: April 2025: €500 million fine and orders to stop anti-steering that blocks developers from telling EU users about cheaper web or alternative-store options. The new-business-terms (NBT) investigation remains open.

When you tap your iPhone to pay, Apple Pay uses NFC wireless tech—but EU regulators say Apple blocked banks and other wallets from using that chip equally. Europe opened an abuse-of-dominance case. Apple is opening NFC access in the EU, yet investigators haven't issued a final ruling or fine.

Outcome: On 11 July 2024 the Commission made Apple's Article 9 commitments binding in AT.40452 and closed the proceedings. For ten years, eligible EEA developers get free access to iPhone NFC so wallet apps can work without Apple Pay. A trustee monitors compliance.

After Epic sued Apple over App Store fees and rules, several state attorneys general filed similar cases. Courts mostly sided with Apple on federal antitrust claims but forced some changes to anti-steering rules. Appeals and state theories continue—Apple has not lost a nationwide monopolization verdict.

Outcome: Mixed Epic/Apple Ninth Circuit outcome in 2023; state claims and consumer suits continue with appeals and remanded issues—no final nationwide liability.

Spotify says Apple used App Store rules to favor Apple Music—blocking cheaper sign-up links and charging commissions rivals couldn't avoid. Europe fined Apple €1.84 billion in 2024 for anti-steering abuse in music streaming. Apple is appealing, and Spotify still fights over DMA fees. The war isn't over, but EU regulators have scored one major win.

Outcome: March 2024 infringement decision imposed €1.84B fine on Apple for music streaming steering; Apple appealed. Spotify pursues further DMA fee challenges—overall dispute not fully closed.

Europe's Digital Markets Act treats the biggest tech platforms like regulated utilities: they must open doors they used to lock. Apple, Google, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and others must offer more choice in app stores, messaging, search defaults, and data sharing. Regulators are still checking whether the changes work—or whether companies comply only on the surface.

Outcome: Designations and core obligations are in force; compliance dialogues, DMA Article 29 market investigations, and potential fines remain active. No final closure of oversight.

Europe closed its Apple Pay antitrust case on 11 July 2024. Apple committed for ten years to let other wallets use the iPhone's tap-to-pay chip in the European Economic Area. Digital Markets Act payment duties are a separate file and were not closed by that decision.

Outcome: The Commission closed AT.40452 on 11 July 2024 by making Apple's NFC access commitments binding for ten years. DMA payment duties are a separate, still-active track.

Spotify says Apple Music competes on iPhones while Apple’s App Store rules tax and silence rival streamers. The EU opened a sector-wide review of music streaming fairness, overlapping with DMA duties and an earlier Apple Music antitrust case. Outcomes are not final.

Outcome: Investigation under Article 102 and DMA overlaps continue; Apple Music streaming case precedent exists separately; no final streaming-specific decision closed the sector review.

Cloud gaming lets you play console-quality games on a phone by streaming from remote servers. Apple historically kept cloud gaming apps off iPhones or forced cumbersome workarounds. Europe's DMA and antitrust reviews ask whether that blocked competition. Access is improving in the EU, but enforcement is not finished.

Outcome: DMA browser and app distribution duties apply; cloud gaming-specific abuse probes and developer disputes continue without final EU-wide remedy.

The US government says Apple keeps iPhone users locked in by hobbling messaging, cloud games, rival watches, and other wallets. A judge let the case proceed in June 2025. It was still in discovery in October 2026, with settlement talks reported and no deal.

Outcome: On 30 June 2025 Judge Julien Neals denied Apple's motion to dismiss and rejected a worldwide market definition. The case is in discovery. Bloomberg reported early settlement talks in July 2026. No deal had been announced by early October 2026, and no trial date was set.

Alongside the DOJ lawsuit, consumers and other private plaintiffs are suing Apple on the same smartphone theory. Those cases are bundled in New Jersey and were still in discovery in 2026.

Outcome: MDL No. 3113 is in coordinated discovery with the government case. A March 2026 status letter showed the parties still fighting over deposition limits. No class trial date was set.

Apple is still in court over how far it must open iOS to rivals under Europe's Digital Markets Act. The fight is about specification decisions, not about whether Apple is a gatekeeper — that designation challenge failed in July 2026.

Outcome: Apple's appeals of specification proceedings DMA.100203 and DMA.100204 were still pending as of September 2026. A published account of the docket said one per-feature deadline remains 1 June 2027. The General Court separately dismissed Apple's challenge to its gatekeeper designation on 8 July 2026.

The UK regulator opened a strategic-market case on Apple's mobile platform in 2025. In 2026 it was still about whether to designate Apple and what rules would follow. It is not the EU fine and not the US lawsuit.

Outcome: Opened in 2025. As with the Google search SMS file, designation and conduct requirements were still the work in progress through 2026. No UK fine in this file.

A Wi-Fi-calling antitrust case is still open against Apple and Google. On September 23, 2026 the judge postponed that decision and sent Samsung's part to arbitration.

Outcome: Samsung was compelled to arbitration. The antitrust merits against Apple and Google were not decided.

Apple wanted to sell e-books on the iPad but didn't like Amazon's low $9.99 bestsellers. Publishers wanted higher prices too. Together they switched to 'agency' pricing where publishers set retail prices—and e-book prices jumped. Courts said that was illegal price fixing.

Outcome: 2013 liability finding after bench trial; injunctions; publisher settlements earlier; Apple paid $450 million consumer settlement after losing appeals.

When you buy an iPhone app, are you buying from Apple or from the app developer? The Supreme Court said from Apple—so consumers could sue Apple directly for alleged App Store monopoly markups, sidestepping the Illinois Brick indirect-purchaser problem.

Outcome: 2019 standing victory for consumers at Supreme Court; merits litigation continued; Apple later adjusted policies in some regions under court and regulatory pressure.