Jury Declares Google’s App Store Monopoly Illegal in Landmark Verdict

Epic Games, the creator of Fortnite, has won a court battle against Google, claiming that the internet giant has built an illegal monopoly within its app store ecosystem. The trial concluded with a unanimous jury finding stating that Google had turned its Google Play app store and Google Play Billing service into an illegal monopoly.

The swift deliberation of the jury, which took only a few hours, led to an unequivocal affirmation of Google’s monopoly power in both the Android app distribution and in-app billing services markets. The jury decided that Google engaged in anticompetitive behavior in these categories, causing Epic harm. Furthermore, the jury ruled that an unlawful tie exists between Google’s app store and its billing payment services. The verdict also deemed Google’s distribution agreements, Project Hug deals with game developers and Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), as anticompetitive.

Despite the unanimous judgment, Google’s Vice President of Affairs and Public Policy, Wilson White, stated the company’s plan to file an appeal. White went on to say, “The trial made clear that we compete fiercely with Apple and its App Store, as well as app stores on Android devices and gaming consoles.”

Epic Games stated in a blog post welcoming the ruling that it was a victory for app creators and customers worldwide. Epic claimed that Google’s app store operations were unlawful, alleging the corporation was exploiting its monopoly to charge unreasonable fees, impede competition, and discourage innovation.

Epic Games’ legal victory is especially noteworthy considering its prior legal struggle with Apple, in which the court found against Epic two years ago. The difference in decisions is due to the particular facts of the Epic v. Google case, which revolved around undisclosed revenue-sharing arrangements between Google, smartphone makers, and big game creators. According to internal documents, Google officials created these arrangements with the intention of discouraging alternative app stores, particularly Epic. Also, in contrast to the Apple verdict, the Google verdict was determined by a jury.

The landmark verdict in Epic v. Google Case Alters App Store Dynamics

The verdict’s immediate consequences are undetermined, as Judge James Donato will assess the necessary remedies in the following weeks. Epic, in contrast, does not seek monetary damages but rather a court order requiring Google to provide every app developer with the flexibility to launch their own app stores and pricing systems on Android. This request is still pending, and all parties are set to meet with Judge Donato in January to explore potential remedies.

Despite Epic’s further request for an anti-circumvention provision that would prevent Google from reintroducing comparable difficulties through alternate means, Judge Donato has indicated his unwillingness to give such an injunction. He emphasized the need to deal with issues as they happen rather than seeking to avert any future infractions in advance.

Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, hinted at significant financial benefits for Epic if it is no longer obligated to pay Google’s fees, implying possible income in the hundreds of millions or possibly billions of dollars. The aftermath of this judicial triumph has the potential to transform the landscape of app store competition and affect future legal conflicts in the tech industry.