Despite Apple agreeing to everything Epic requested during discovery, Epic claims the company is attempting to artificially delay the litigation process.
No one knows how the Supreme Court might rule on whether Apple violated an injunction because of the “spirit of the law.” Meanwhile, Epic seems desperate to speed up discovery in light of this monumental decision.
According to a joint document from Apple and Epic, there appears to be some controversy over the status of the production and discovery of the documents. Epic suggests that Apple is not complying and is creating artificial delays while Apple’s response amounts to a long “nuh-uh.”
Epic requests that Apple provide all requested documents, including fee information for regions outside the United States, by November 1. The new deadline is weeks earlier than the previous one set for Thanksgiving.
According to the filing, Apple determined its proposed link fee rates in August through several months-long meetings. Then CEO Tim Cook, CFO Kevan Parekh, head of services Eddy Cue and head of App Store Carson Oliver decided on the rates.
Of the documents already provided, Epic complains of duplications, heavy revisions and missing information. They expected more information about many more people who would take part in the commission’s decisions.
Apple rejects
Apple’s statement in the document says it agreed to seek and produce non-privileged documents in response to all 16 of Epic’s document requests relating to 27 custodians. Search will also be conducted using Epic’s generic search terms.
Epic’s lawsuit against Apple has so far been an unmitigated failure for the company
Apple firmly believes that it has not delayed or withheld the production of the requested documents. It places blame on Epic for requesting such a large amount of documents that go “well beyond what is necessary to evaluate Apple’s proposal.”
Epic is presumably using the document as a sign of an argument and disagreement that doesn’t exist, at least according to Apple. In an effort to move forward with discovery and avoid further negotiations, Apple has agreed to all of Epic’s demands, yet the company continues to claim otherwise.
Making matters even more embarrassing, Epic’s attempts to single out Apple as the one that launched Thanksgiving as the original expiration date. Apparently, not only did Epic propose that date originally, it didn’t get to Apple to negotiate a new date, and Monday’s document is the first Apple has heard about the earlier date.
Apple debunks Epic’s arguments with eight key points that essentially suggest that everything Epic claims is incorrect. Instead, Apple paints the picture of being forced into an impossible situation to produce numerous documents that far exceed the scope of the case.
Epic wants the court to get mad at Apple
It appears, based on the documents presented by Apple, that Epic is simply unhappy that the documents provided are not what Epic was hoping to see, even if they are the relevant ones. It also appears that Epic is hoping to paint Apple in a bad light as a way to pressure the court, already angry at Apple, into agreeing with them.
Apple says business decisions regarding the new fees were necessarily made with the limited group of executives due to the Court’s decision. The Ninth Circuit’s restrictions on what Apple could do meant that the decision-making process was simplified and limited in scope compared to the original proposal found to be infringing.
Despite this, the scope of the search is still large and will produce hundreds of documents, which will take time.
The Court will have to decide whether any action is necessary. Either it will determine that Epic is right and Apple is causing artificial delays or Apple is complying and will meet the original Thanksgiving deadline.
Expect some sort of public documentation and rebuttals on that court decision in the near future. Of course, all of this could be called into question depending on how the Supreme Court rules in its ruling on the validity of Apple’s violation of the original injunction.
