Google’s Android App Store is an illegal monopoly—and now it has to change.
Today, Judge James Donato made the final ruling Epic v. Googleordering Google to effectively open the Google Play app store to competition within three years. Google will have to distribute rival third-party app stores within Google Play, which must give competing third-party app stores access to the full catalog of Google Play apps unless developers individually opt out. These are Epic’s biggest claims, but they’re not all Epic wins today.
Beginning on November 1, 2024 and ending on November 1, 2027, Google must also:
- Stop requiring apps distributed on the Google Play Store to use Google Pay Billing (Jury finds Google illegally tied its payment system to its app store)
- Let Android developers tell users other ways to pay in the Play Store
- Let Android developers link to ways to download apps outside of the Play Store
- Allow Android developers to set their own prices for apps without having to consider Play Billing
- “Share app revenue with any person or entity that distributes Android apps” or plans to launch an app store
- Offer money or benefits to developers for exclusive or priority launch of their apps on the Play Store
- Offer money or benefits to developers to keep their apps from being published on competitors’ stores
- Offer money or benefits to device manufacturers or operators to pre-install the Play Store
- Offering money or benefits to device manufacturers or operators to prevent them from pre-installing a competitor’s store
Google will still have some control over safety and security when it opens the Google Play Store to rival stores. The ban says Google can “take reasonable steps” that are “strictly necessary and tailored” and are “comparable” to how the Google Play Store is currently regulated. Google will also be able to charge regulatory fees. Epic has repeatedly argued that Google should not be able to block third-party app stores through regulation.
Judge Donato gave Google eight months to come up with a system and a three-person technical committee jointly selected by Epic and Google to review any disputes.
Epic didn’t get everything it asked for: It wanted the judge to allow Google Play to stay open for six years instead of three, to allow users to sideload apps with a click, and for Google to stop bundling Android APIs with Google Play.
Why not six years? “These regulations are intended to level the playing field for competitors to enter and grow without placing an undue burden on Google,” Donato wrote. “As competition begins, and Google Play becomes unfair As the network effects it enjoys diminish, Google should not be unduly constrained as a competitor.”
Epic Games initially sued Google on August 13, 2020, the same day it also sued Apple. The game developer has laid a calculated trap for the two tech giants, trying to bypass their 30% in-app purchase fee with a surprise update to its super-hit game Fortress Night. Both tech companies retaliate with kicks fort night Removed from their app stores, only to be met with a coordinated #FreeFortnite action campaign and two lawsuits alleging each created an illegal monopoly.
The Apple case is over, with Apple mostly winning: The Supreme Court rejected Epic’s final appeal in January. The only thing Epic has legally accomplished there is an order repealing Apple’s “antiboot rules,” which theoretically allows developers to freely tell their customers how to bypass Apple’s payment system. (Because I’m bound by ethics, I won’t discuss the Apple case any more than this brief overview.)
But the Google case took much longer to get started and progressed very differently. I spent 15 days reporting live from the courtroom, and I saw Epic show time and time again that Google was scared, didn’t treat developers equally, and had something to hide.
The jury is in Epic v. Google Convinced: In December, it unanimously ruled that the Google Play app store and Google Play Billing services were illegal monopolies and that many of its special deals with game developers and phone manufacturers were anti-competitive.
In August, Judge Donato warned Google that it would pay consequences for its actions. “We’re going to tear down barriers, that’s how it’s going to happen,” he said. During the remedial hearing, he rejected Google’s suggestion that meeting Epic’s request would require too much work, cost too much money, or couldn’t be arranged without spending a significant amount of time.
It’s unclear whether Google must immediately comply with the court’s request. Google has pledged to appeal the ruling and, like Apple, may ask the appeals court to halt enforcement of Judge Donato’s order while it tries its luck again. Apple spent years delaying the reverse-steering rule change through legal appeals.
A week ago, Epic filed a second lawsuit against Google (and Samsung), saying the companies were already trying to sidestep the impending ban by adding extra friction to third-party app stores. The case is related to the case, so Judge Donato will also hear the case.
Epic and Google did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
