When Apple removes free music streaming app Musi from the App Store in 2024, the developers sued. This week, a federal judge dismissed with prejudice what could become a landmark case over the App Store’s delisting. Here are the details.
Apple walked away with as complete a legal victory as possible
as noted by Ars TechnicaU.S. District Judge Eumi Lee of the Northern District of California in 2024 dismissed Musi Inc.’s lawsuit against Apple with prejudice.
In short, Musi was a free streaming music app that took songs from YouTube and was removed from the App Store after Google claimed it violated the video platform’s terms of service.
Musi, on the other hand, has disputed the claim from the start, arguing that what it’s doing is no different than its users accessing YouTube directly from a web browser.
After the delisting of the program, Musi Inc. sued, and one of its arguments was that Apple acted in bad faith and “knowingly relied on false evidence” to remove Musi from the App Store.
Today, Judge Lee ruled that Apple is allowed to remove apps from the App Store “with or without cause” as defined in the Apple Developer Program License Agreement.
The plain language of the DPLA governs because it is clear and unambiguous: Apple “may stop marketing, offering, and allowing the download of (the Musi app) by end users at any time by providing a notice of termination.” (…) Based on this language, Apple had the right to stop offering the Musi software without cause if Apple provided Musi with notice. The complaint alleges, and Musi does not dispute, that Apple gave Musi the proper notice. (…) Therefore, Apple’s decision to remove Musi from the App Store did not violate the DPLA.
In addition to dismissing the lawsuit, Judge Lee also partially granted Apple’s motion for Rule 11 sanctions against Musi Inc.’s law firm, faulting its attorneys for making claims of “bad faith” without factual basis.
From his decision:
After two months of discovery, which included seizing Apple witnesses and reviewing Apple documents, Winston & Strawn was not entitled to correct facts to fill in gaps in Musi’s case.
In the “malicious” filing, the company’s legal team claimed that Apple and “unnamed ‘music industry players'” devised a “back-channel scheme” to remove Musi from the App Store, and that Apple “admitted” that it knowingly relied on false evidence to do so.
Judge Lee said in his ruling that “this is one of the rare cases in which Rule 11 sanctions are necessary and appropriate,” and as a result, Musi Inc.’s law firm was ordered to pay Apple’s legal fees and costs associated with the sanctions proposal.
Since the claim was dismissed with prejudice, this means that Musi Inc. cannot file the same claim again.
You can read Judge Lee’s order granting Apple’s motion to dismiss the suit hereand its order partially granted Apple’s motion for Rule 11 sanctions here.
It’s worth checking out on Amazon
FTC: We use automatic affiliate links that generate income. More.
