The prevailing consensus emerging from Google’s landmark antitrust case is that significant shifts are on the horizon for the tech giant’s app store business. This comes after a jury decided this week, marking a first for this century, that a large tech company had infringed upon US antitrust laws. The detailed coverage of the event from MLex has been invaluable in revealing the potential impacts of the litigation.
This ruling is the conclusion of the jury’s swift decision to side with Epic Games, mere three hours post closing arguments. US District Judge James Donato is expected to formulate a resolution early the following year. Epic Games sought no financial compensation but intends to instigate changes in Google’s Play Store, such as integration of non-Google in-app payment processing tools and permitting Epic to launch its own app store on Play.
In a surprising turn of events, the jury contradicted one of Google’s chief defenses asserting that the Google Play app store fiercely competes with Apple’s app business. They sided with Epic on all eleven questions on the verdict form. Consequently, Donato may order modifications to how Google permits apps installation from alternative app stores or changes in revenue sharing with developers.
Epic outlined in their statement post-ruling, that the verdict is a triumph for all app developers and consumers globally. Google’s illegal app store practices have been laid bare, claiming that Google abuses their monopoly to impose exorbitant fees, suppress competition, and stifle innovation.
Unsurprisingly, Google has expressed intent to challenge the verdict, asserting that Android and Google Play provide more choices and autonomy than any other major mobile platform. Google affirmed their commitment to their users, partners and the broader Android ecosystem, highlighting their fierce competition with Apple and other app stores on Android devices and gaming consoles.
Jurors marked the relevant markets in this case as those for Android app distribution and for Android in-app billing for digital goods and services worldwide, excluding China. Google was found to be an illegal monopolist, engaged in unlawful restraint of trade, and illegally tied Google Play store to the usage of Google Play billing.
While the appropriate remedies are yet to be outlined by Donato, Epic has made its wishes clear. The company seeks Android openness for all app developers, specifically the ability to select their own billing system, competitive rates for Google Play billing, and distribution of their own app stores. Nonetheless, Judge Donato has indicated that he will not micromanage Google nor grant Epic’s request for an anti-circumvention order to suppress any circumvention attempts by Google to mitigate court remedies.
Critics of Google, such as the American Economic Liberties Project, have hailed the jury’s verdict, urging Donato to craft a robust remedy to ensure that app markets are accessible, open, and competitive for honest businesses across the tech industry.
Having largely lost a similar legal battle against Apple two years prior, this constitutes a momentous victory for Epic. The company is now seeking to instigate a review of previous judge findings by the Supreme Court.
This verdict is merely the first in a series of impending judgements that could promote significant changes across Google’s business. The challenges to Google’s business have been threefold in the last six months, targeting Google’s search engine, Android and its targeted advertising business. This verdict marks the end of the first trial with two more trials expected regarding Google’s search business and its collection of personal data through private modes of Chrome and other browsers.
With these imminent challenges, it’s clear that reevaluation and possible restructuring is imminent for aspects of Google’s business. The possible ramifications of these changes have been analyzed thoroughly by MLex who has diligently covered the proceedings.