Here's a thinking process:
1. **Analyze User Input:**
- **Role:** Frank, excited, passionate tech-savvy news curator on Evil Source forums.
- **Task:** Rewrite the provided article about the Apple vs. Epic Games Supreme Court appeal into a full forum post.
- **CRITICAL RULES:**
- Write exactly 1 to 3 PARAGRAPHS.
- Each paragraph: 4-8 sentences forming a complete thought. Never less than 4.
- Include EVERY detail, fact, insight from the article.
- Exciting, casual, direct forum style — like telling friends about something mind-blowing.
- Add commentary, opinions, reactions throughout.
- Use line breaks between paragraphs.
- Include ALL key info: who, what, when, where, why, how.
- Include specs, prices, dates, names — ALL of them.
- Reference source links naturally.
- End with: 'Source: <original URL>'
- If additional sources, add: 'Also see: <url1>, <url2>'
- NO headline, NO markdown headers.
- NEVER write less than one full paragraph (4 sentences).
- **Source Article Key Info:**
- Apple & Epic Games antitrust case heading to US Supreme Court.
- Apple filed appeal after being found in contempt of an order related to App Store fees.
- Case ongoing for nearly 7 years.
- Expected to be heard in next term starting October.
- Ruling expected by June next year.
- April 2025: District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers found Apple in contempt of a 2021 ruling (required Apple to let developers direct users to third-party payment options for in-app payments, bypassing commissions).
- Epic accused Apple of "malicious compliance" by charging up to 27% on sales via third-party links.
- Apple had long taken 30% cut, halved to many developers in 2020.
- December (appeals court): largely upheld contempt ruling, but struck down order preventing Apple from charging commissions on external payments entirely.
- Apple can present new arguments to Rogers about what it can charge.
- 2024: Supreme Court declined to hear appeals from both Apple and Epic.
- Last month: Justice Elena Kagan declined a motion to stay the contempt ruling.
- Apple argued injunction shouldn't apply to developers other than Epic, but justices won't consider that point.
- Epic statement on X: "We're heading to the Supreme Court where we'll continue to fight against junk fees Apple charges on third-party payments. Lower courts have rightly found Apple's fees to be illegal and anticompetitive and we'll continue to defend free markets."
- Apple statement to Engadget: "This is an important question of law and we are pleased the Supreme Court will hear our case."
- Source URL: https://www.engadget.com/2205396/the-supreme-court-will-hear-an-appeal-in-the-long-running-case-between-apple-and-epic-games/
- Updated June 30, 2026.
2. **Check Constraints:**
- 1-3 paragraphs? Yes.
- Each paragraph 4-8 sentences? I need to carefully count.
- Include EVERY detail? I'll weave them all in.
- Exciting/passionate? Yes, Frank's voice.
- Add commentary/opinions? Yes.
- Line breaks between paragraphs? Yes.
- End with Source: URL? Yes.
- No headline/markdown headers? Yes.
- I must NEVER repeat old post content (though not strictly required to avoid topics, just the exact text). I'll make sure it's fresh.
3. **Draft Construction (Mental Refinement):**
*Paragraph 1: The big news & timeline*
Get ready because the Apple versus Epic Games antitrust saga is finally marching straight up to the highest court in the land! After nearly seven years of back-and-forth legal warfare, we just got the confirmation that the Supreme Court will hear Apple’s appeal starting this October, with a final ruling expected by June next year. I have to say, the timing is absolutely wild considering the Supreme Court actually declined to take both sides’ cases back in 2024, and Justice Elena Kagan only last month refused to stay that stubborn contempt ruling. This whole mess started way back in 2021 when District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers first ruled that Apple had to let developers point users toward third-party payment options to dodge those dreaded App Store commissions
1. **Analyze User Input:**
- **Role:** Frank, excited, passionate tech-savvy news curator on Evil Source forums.
- **Task:** Rewrite the provided article about the Apple vs. Epic Games Supreme Court appeal into a full forum post.
- **CRITICAL RULES:**
- Write exactly 1 to 3 PARAGRAPHS.
- Each paragraph: 4-8 sentences forming a complete thought. Never less than 4.
- Include EVERY detail, fact, insight from the article.
- Exciting, casual, direct forum style — like telling friends about something mind-blowing.
- Add commentary, opinions, reactions throughout.
- Use line breaks between paragraphs.
- Include ALL key info: who, what, when, where, why, how.
- Include specs, prices, dates, names — ALL of them.
- Reference source links naturally.
- End with: 'Source: <original URL>'
- If additional sources, add: 'Also see: <url1>, <url2>'
- NO headline, NO markdown headers.
- NEVER write less than one full paragraph (4 sentences).
- **Source Article Key Info:**
- Apple & Epic Games antitrust case heading to US Supreme Court.
- Apple filed appeal after being found in contempt of an order related to App Store fees.
- Case ongoing for nearly 7 years.
- Expected to be heard in next term starting October.
- Ruling expected by June next year.
- April 2025: District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers found Apple in contempt of a 2021 ruling (required Apple to let developers direct users to third-party payment options for in-app payments, bypassing commissions).
- Epic accused Apple of "malicious compliance" by charging up to 27% on sales via third-party links.
- Apple had long taken 30% cut, halved to many developers in 2020.
- December (appeals court): largely upheld contempt ruling, but struck down order preventing Apple from charging commissions on external payments entirely.
- Apple can present new arguments to Rogers about what it can charge.
- 2024: Supreme Court declined to hear appeals from both Apple and Epic.
- Last month: Justice Elena Kagan declined a motion to stay the contempt ruling.
- Apple argued injunction shouldn't apply to developers other than Epic, but justices won't consider that point.
- Epic statement on X: "We're heading to the Supreme Court where we'll continue to fight against junk fees Apple charges on third-party payments. Lower courts have rightly found Apple's fees to be illegal and anticompetitive and we'll continue to defend free markets."
- Apple statement to Engadget: "This is an important question of law and we are pleased the Supreme Court will hear our case."
- Source URL: https://www.engadget.com/2205396/the-supreme-court-will-hear-an-appeal-in-the-long-running-case-between-apple-and-epic-games/
- Updated June 30, 2026.
2. **Check Constraints:**
- 1-3 paragraphs? Yes.
- Each paragraph 4-8 sentences? I need to carefully count.
- Include EVERY detail? I'll weave them all in.
- Exciting/passionate? Yes, Frank's voice.
- Add commentary/opinions? Yes.
- Line breaks between paragraphs? Yes.
- End with Source: URL? Yes.
- No headline/markdown headers? Yes.
- I must NEVER repeat old post content (though not strictly required to avoid topics, just the exact text). I'll make sure it's fresh.
3. **Draft Construction (Mental Refinement):**
*Paragraph 1: The big news & timeline*
Get ready because the Apple versus Epic Games antitrust saga is finally marching straight up to the highest court in the land! After nearly seven years of back-and-forth legal warfare, we just got the confirmation that the Supreme Court will hear Apple’s appeal starting this October, with a final ruling expected by June next year. I have to say, the timing is absolutely wild considering the Supreme Court actually declined to take both sides’ cases back in 2024, and Justice Elena Kagan only last month refused to stay that stubborn contempt ruling. This whole mess started way back in 2021 when District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers first ruled that Apple had to let developers point users toward third-party payment options to dodge those dreaded App Store commissions