North Dakota rejects anti-Apple App Store bill drafted by Epic Games lobbyist

Credit: AppleInsider

The North Dakota State Senate has voted against a bill that would have forced Apple to allow developers and users to bypass the App Store for app payments and downloads.

In a 11-36 vote on Tuesday, North Dakota's lawmakers rejected the legislation that was initially drafted by an Epic Games lobbyist. The lobbyist, Lacee Bjork Anderson, was also paid by the Coalition for App Fairness.

Ahead of the vote, Anderson admitted that the bill may not have the votes to pass. According to the North Dakota Senate floor calendar, the bill was listed as a "do not pass" per committee recommendations.

Even though the bill has failed in North Dakota, the fight over app store rules is far from over. The New York Times reports that lawmakers in Georgia and Arizona are considering nearly identical legislation. A state representative in Massachusetts said he was considering introducing a similar bill, and app store legislation is also being pushed in Wisconsin and Minnesota.

The legislation is just part of a broader fight over control of mobile app ecosystems. Apple and Epic Games, for example, are in the midst of a dispute over a violation of developer guidelines that resulted in "Fortnite" being pulled from the App Store.

The legal fight between Apple and Epic Games will go to trial on May 3, 2021 in a U.S. District Court in California.

Follow AppleInsider on Google News

57 Comments

tommikele

said about 3 years ago

Epic fail by Epic. Such attempts are likely to fail everywhere whether it is because legislatures won't pass them or Federal courts strike them down. States don't have to jurisdiction to regulate interstate commerce. If the Feds pass a law/regulation it may be different, but for now it is unlikely to go anywhere.

As soon as the first bill passes, years of litigation and court tests will begin.

bluefire1

said about 3 years ago

Good!!!!!!!

EsquireCats

said about 3 years ago

Just imagine the precedent that would set.
It's like declaring that all stores are merely showrooms, be damned the store owner's operational expenses.

Sure some stores are just showrooms, but not all stores are showrooms.

anantksundaram

said about 3 years ago

Good. Lawmakers -- even state-level ones -- don't like to be made to feel like they're pawns for someone else's agenda (even if it is often the case that they may be pawns in legislation that does get passed -- the public nature of it, thanks to Epic's boorishness, is always a non-starter).

This was entirely predictable (and predicted)!

FileMakerFeller

said about 3 years ago

I just love that this lobbyist is getting paid by Epic twice (the second time indirectly through the Coalition), knew that there was a good chance the attempt would fail, and is still working on this doomed endeavour.

I wonder if someone hired for attitude, not skills? :D