In what is surely signs of a potential blow to Epic's request for an injunction against Apple to allow Fortnite to remain on iOS, and it's subsequent anti-trust lawsuit, the judge preceding over the case, judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers stated her belief that Epic was "not honest" when it implemented it's bypass of Apple's payment system within the game.
While there has yet to be a ruling on the injunction, judge Rogers suggested that Epic's own actions have helped to justify Apple's defense in the matter, specifically, that their policies and practices are there to protect users, and that by bypassing this without notice, the move was a potential security issue.
You did something, you lied about it by omission, by not being forthcoming. That's the security issue. That's the security issue! There are a lot of people in the public who consider you guys heroes for what you guys did, but it's still not honest.
She also stated that she felt Epic's argument that Apple's payment policies result in 'tie-in' sales - meaning a consumer has to purchase something else in order to buy the product they actually want - was not convincing.
She went on to state that she didn't feel in-app purchases as a "separate and distinct product" in and of itself, a finding that will likely see Apple win if it's echoed in the antitrust lawsuit.
The judge also suggested the concept of a "walled garden" was not new, and cited Nintendo and Sony's consoles as an example of other walled gardens within the gaming industry, believing Apple's ecosystem to be no different.
All in all, it's been a rough day in court for Apple, even if no findings have yet been reached. It does seem likely that Epic will lose their injunction case, however, with the antitrust lawsuit also now looking decidedly in Apple's favour.
The case is likely to go before trial in July 2021.