Apple is not blocking Epic Games from updating Fortnite in the European Union

Previous: A look at a Mac App Store top grosser
Articles index Jeff Johnson (My apps, PayPal.Me, Mastodon)

May 19 2025

I'm an App Store developer, and for the sake of all developers, I hope that Epic Games prevails in court against Apple. Nonetheless, I personally value truth and honesty above my financial interests, and thus I have a problem with some of the statements made by Epic Games and its CEO Tim Sweeney on the social media service formerly known as Twitter. These tweets, as they are still called, have given many people the impression that Apple is indefinitely blocking Epic Games from updating its iPhone app Fortnite in the European Union, where it's available in an alternative marketplace outside the App Store, as prescribed by the EU Digital Markets Act. I'll cite several sources, including court documents and Apple's developer documentation, to show that Epic Games could still update Fortnite in the EU, if they chose to do so.

On May 16, the official Fortnite account tweeted:

Apple has blocked our Fortnite submission so we cannot release to the US App Store or to the Epic Games Store for iOS in the European Union. Now, sadly, Fortnite on iOS will be offline worldwide until Apple unblocks it.

In response, Apple provided a short statement to Bloomberg, tweeted by Mark Gurman:

Apple: We asked that Epic Sweden resubmit the app update without including the US storefront of the App Store so as not to impact Fortnite in other geographies. We did not take any action to remove the live version of Fortnite from alternative distribution marketplaces in the EC

Later—that evening in the US, the next day in the EU—the Epic Games Newsroom account tweeted:

Yesterday afternoon, Apple broke its week-long silence on the status of our app review with a letter saying they will not act on the Fortnite app submission until the Ninth Circuit Court rules on the partial stay. We believe this violates the Court’s Injunction and we have filed a second Motion to Enforce Injunction with the US District Court for the Northern District of California.

We’ve been transparent with Apple about our intentions while they’ve used app review and notarization as a pretext to circumvent the Court’s injunction and the EU Digital Markets Act. Apple’s “solution” required us to submit two versions of Fortnite, in violation of their guideline that developers shouldn’t submit multiple versions of the same app. That’s not the standard Apple holds other developers to and it’s blocking us from releasing our update in the EU and US. Apple is again retaliating against Epic for challenging the legality of their anticompetitive behavior and we will fight on.

Read the filing here. https://fn.gg/May16EpicFiling

And then:

Here’s the letter we received from Apple on May 15th: https://fn.gg/May15AppleLetter

Without the link shorteners, the documents are at https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/05-16-25-epic-games-filing-16f7f43cb85d.pdf and https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/05-15-25-letter-from-apple-14bad27bb985.pdf respectively.

On May 17, Tim Sweeney tweeted:

Apple is currently blocking Epic Games Sweden’s Fortnite notarization despite finding no rule violations, while demanding we revoke our Fortnite submission to the US App Store. We are going back to US court to argue that Apple is again violating the injunction.

And then:

As a result, Fortnite is offline on iOS in the European Union indefinitely despite being distributed through the Epic Games Store there. Apple’s abuse of its interlocked web of controls shows that any notarization process must be in the hands of an independent body.

If you're confused, it's understandable. I was confused too! The key to understanding the situation is to go beyond the pithy PR statements of Apple and Epic. We have a puzzle with some missing pieces, because each of the warring parties presents only the information intended to make them look good, omitting details that might make them look worse.

Let's look at Apple's developer document about submitting apps for notarization in the European Union:

If you’ve opted into alternative distribution for customers in the European Union, you can choose to make your app version eligible for distribution on alternative app marketplaces or websites only by selecting to have it evaluated based on the Notarization Review Guidelines (a subset of the App Review Guidelines). Otherwise, App Review uses App Review Guidelines to evaluate your app version to make it eligible for distribution on the App Store, alternative app marketplaces, and websites if approved.

The instructions in this document include a screenshot (click for full size) of App Store Connect, the website that developers use to manage App Store submissions:

The Review Type dialog in the screenshot explains the difference:

You can choose to submit this app version for the following types of review.

• App Store
  This version will be evaluated against App Store Review Guidelines. Approved versions can be distributed through the App Store and alternative distribution.
• Notarization
  This version will be evaluated against Notarization Review Guidelines. Approved versions can be distributed through alternative distribution.

Until this month, Epic Games had used the Notarization option to distribute Fortnite in the EU. On May 9, Epic submitted an update to Fortnite using the App Store option, as announced by a tweet:

We’ve submitted Fortnite to Apple for review so we can launch on the App Store in the U.S.

Technically, there's a separate App Store for each country in the world in which the App Store is available. App Store developers can choose which countries to support. In most cases, developers distribute their apps worldwide, but in this case Epic appears to have selected only the United States App Store, presumably because of the US District Court order on April 30 that allows App Store apps to link to outside purchase methods without restrictions or fees. Since the court's jurisdiction is the US, the court order applies only to the US App Store, just as the Digital Markets Act applies only to the EU.

As noted in the court order, Apple had actually terminated Epic's US developer accounts several years ago:

Apple declined to reinstate Epic’s developer account after this Court held in its Order that Epic had breached the DPLA. See Epic Games, Inc., 67 F.4th at 999.

The DPLA is the Apple Developer Program License Agreement. The court order reiterates that Epic violated the DPLA, thus entitling Apple to legal relief, which may include recovering attorneys' fees from Epic. This is why the quoted statements above refer to Epic Sweden, in the EU. As noted in Epic's May 16 court filing, they acquired an Apple developer account in Sweden as a result of the EU DMA:

Accordingly, in early 2024, Epic applied for a developer program account through a European-domiciled subsidiary, Epic Games Sweden AB. Apple approved that account but then revoked it within days, citing in part Mr. Sweeney’s public criticism of Apple’s response to the DMA. After the EC opened an inquiry into the matter, Apple reversed course and reinstated the Epic Games Sweden AB developer account.

The May 15 letter from Apple's attorney to Epic's attorney, now Exhibit D of Epic's court filing and linked in their May 16 tweet, expands on Apple's brief PR:

As you are well aware, Apple has previously denied requests to reinstate the Epic Games developer account, and we have informed you that Apple will not revisit that decision until after the U.S. litigation between the parties concludes. In our view, the same reasoning extends to returning Fortnite to the U.S. storefront of the App Store regardless of which Epic-related entity submits the app. If Epic believes that there is some factual or legal development that warrants further consideration of this position, please let us know in writing. In the meantime, Apple has determined not to take action on the Fortnite app submission until after the Ninth Circuit rules on our pending request for a partial stay of the new injunction.

I understand that the recent submission by Epic Sweden included a proposed Fortnite app for the U.S. storefront of the App Store as well as for alternative distribution in other geographies. To prevent our discussions surrounding the U.S. storefront of the App Store from impacting Fortnite in other geographies, please withdraw that submission and resubmit the app without including the U.S. storefront of the App Store (this can be accomplished by unchecking the relevant box). If you wish to submit for review a Fortnite app for the U.S. storefront of the App Store, please do so separately through an entity other than Epic Sweden that has executed the appropriate schedule to the DPLA.

Presumably, "unchecking the relevant box" refers to the Review Type in the screenshot from the Apple developer documentation. I am puzzled, though, by the phrase "separately through an entity other than Epic Sweden." I have no idea what Apple's attorney is referring to here, especially since the previous paragraph said, "regardless of which Epic-related entity submits the app." Purely speculating, the only interpretation that makes a bit of sense to me is that Apple wants Epic's developer account for alternative distribution in the EU to remain devoted exclusively to that purpose and completely avoid touching the App Store, whereas an entirely separate account could submit Fortnite to the App Store, although of course Apple has no current intention to approve such a submission, pending court decisions.

When a developer submits an app to Apple for a review, the process involves several steps. Initially, the submission has the status of "Waiting for Review", which means that it's simply sitting in a queue until a reviewer is assigned to look at the submission. Next, when the submission hits the top of queue, the status becomes "In Review". The developer can choose what happens if the submission is approved; there are three options: "Manually release this version", "Automatically release this version", or "Automatically release this version after App Review, no earlier than" [date and time]. If the developer chooses to manually release, then the status becomes "Pending Developer Release" after approval. At any point in this process prior to release in the App Store, the developer can choose to reject their own submission, simply by clicking "cancel this release" in App Store Connect. This is a perfectly normal thing to do, typically because the developer discovers a new bug in the app after submitting to Apple but before releasing in the App Store, and I've done it myself a number of times. (A couple of months ago, I had to do this while my submission was "In Review". Yoink! I fixed the bug and then submitted a new update, which started over "Waiting for Review" and was eventually approved.)

Indeed, while Epic was waiting for app review to take action on the Fortnite update, they had to reject their own submission and post a new one, due to online content changes. From Epic's May 16 court filing:

Although Apple claims that it reviews 90% of submissions within 24 hours, the May 9 Fortnite submission sat in limbo for five days. (Bornstein Decl. Ex. B.) Because Epic intended to launch on May 16 an updated version of Fortnite across all platforms, with significant new content developed jointly with a third party, the version of Fortnite that Epic submitted on May 9 became stale. (Bornstein Decl. Ex. C.) Thus, on May 14, 2025, Epic withdrew its submission and resubmitted an updated version. Id. The May 14 submission again included, side-by-side, Apple’s IAP and a link to cheaper purchases on the Epic Games Store. Id. Epic also notified Apple that the May 14 version needed to be approved by May 16 to meet the global launch timeline for the new version.

Indisputably, on the legal record, Epic Games has demonstrated their knowledge that submissions to Apple can be withdrawn and replaced. Thus, I see no reason why Epic can't follow the suggestion of Apple's lawyer to "please withdraw that submission and resubmit the app without including the U.S. storefront of the App Store".

Epic has also already demonstrated indisputably, via the letter from Apple's attorney, that Epic submitted a Fortnite update for both the US App Store and the EU alternative marketplace, and Apple admitted that they are refusing to approve that submission. The court would appear to have all of the evidence it needs to consider Epic's motion, and consequently there appears to be no good legal reason why Epic needs to sit in review purgatory instead of rejecting the May 14 Fortnite update and submitting a new update using the Notarization option instead of the App Store option. If the court ultimately agrees with Epic's motion, then at that point Epic can immediately submit a new update to Apple for both the US App Store and EU alternative marketplace. As far as I can tell, Epic is now voluntarily choosing not to update Fortnite in the EU, refusing to follow Apple's suggestion, thereby depriving Epic's EU users of the ability to play Fortnite. I don't want to psychoanalyze Tim Sweeney, so you'll have to ask him why, if he's willing to admit that Apple is not actually blocking Fortnite indefinitely in the EU.

To be perfectly clear: Apple is indefinitely blocking the May 14 submission of Fortnite that includes both the US App Store and the EU alternative marketplace, but Apple is not blocking EU-only submissions of Fortnite, which can continue at any time.

Addendum: Epic's questionable legal argument

I have no idea whether the court will grant or deny Epic's motion. However, I do take issue with the way Epic has articulated part of its argument. From the May 16 court filing:

On May 1, 2025, Epic notified Apple of its intent to avail itself of the Injunction and the new Guidelines. Specifically, Epic notified Apple that Epic would use the same developer account that it uses to distribute the Epic Games Store and Fortnite in the European Union to submit Fortnite for App Review in the U.S. Epic invited Apple to provide it with further direction if Apple preferred that Epic submit Fortnite for review another way (e.g., through a different developer account). On May 2, 2025, Apple—through its outside counsel— stated that if Epic wanted to submit using the process Epic had outlined, it should do so. (Bornstein Decl. ¶ 5.)

Exhibit A is an email thread between Epic and an Apple World Wide Developer Relations representative between May 1 and May 4. For illustrative purposes, I'll quote the entirety of Apple's emails, except for the names of the participants:

Thanks for the heads up. Let me check and get back to you ASAP. We're working to figure out the right way to do this. Can you hold off for a bit? OK. Thanks for the heads up. Stand by. Received! Working on it. Thank you for the heads up. Socialized.
Sent from my iPhone

At first I thought that "Socialized" was the result of iPhone autocorrupt, but someone suggested to me that this was intentional, some new corporate-speak for "shared with the people involved/affected", which makes me want to vomit. Anyway, it's clear that the Apple WWDR representative was merely acknowledging the receipt of Epic's emails and at no point offered advice or suggestions other than to wait.

Epic's May 16 court filing includes a declaration from Epic's lawyer, who recounts a phone conversation with Apple's lawyer:

On May 2, 2025, Mark A. Perry, counsel for Apple, called me about the Fortnite submission. Mr. Perry stated that because of the litigation between Epic and Apple, the submission had been escalated to his attention. He told me that Apple could not comment on whether the proposed Fortnite build would be accepted because Apple had not yet received it for review, but that if Epic wanted to submit the build using the Epic Games Sweden AB account, Epic should go ahead and do so.

I want to emphasize two crucial parts of that conversation:

1. "Apple could not comment on whether the proposed Fortnite build would be accepted"
2. "if Epic wanted to submit the build using the Epic Games Sweden AB account"

Apple did not unqualifiedly suggest that Epic go ahead and submit Fortnite for the US App Store. Epic had already stated their intention to do so, and Apple was simply approving (or at least not objecting to) that specific action, without giving any indication of whether the submission would be approved for the App Store. And while Apple has indeed declined to approve the submission, they haven't taken any further action against Epic in retaliation or punishment for the submission. For example, the Epic Sweden developer account has not been revoked; to the contrary, Apple has recommended that Epic continue to use that account to submit EU-only updates to Fortnite.

Jeff Johnson (My apps, PayPal.Me, Mastodon) Articles index
Previous: A look at a Mac App Store top grosser