Following Epic Games's recent victory over Apple, which effectively forced the iPhone maker to allow third-party apps on iOS in the EU, the game developer and distributor has won a similar case against Google, except in the US, this time. The ruling places several restrictions on what Google can and can't do when it comes to the Android operating system and how it positions its own apps and services on Android phones, including prohibiting Google from paying device manufacturers to include its Play software on their devices and forcing developers to use Google's payment platform.

The ruling (PDF) and its consequent restrictions will start on November 1, 2024, will last three years, and Google isn't particularly happy about the mandated changes, having already confirmed that it will appeal the decision, citing security concerns and arguing that the order would negatively affect developers: "these changes would put consumers' privacy and security at risk, make it harder for developers to promote their apps, and reduce competition on devices."In summary, the ruling means Google may no longer:

• Pay developers or share revenue with developers in exchange for launching an app to the Google Play Store with any form of exclusivity or in any way make or incentivize any app developer to offer a different version of their app on the Play Store.
• Pay a manufacturer or otherwise incentivize a manufacturer to pre-install Google Play Services or apps on any devices.
• In any way prevent device manufacturers from installing other app stores or distribution platforms on their Android devices—including incentivizing them against installing these other platforms.
• Prevent app developers from offering and telling users about reduced prices for Android apps and subscriptions outside of Google's payment and distribution ecosystem.
• Prohibit third-party app store developers from offering their app stores on the Play Store.

It also forces Google to make any Android apps currently on the Play Store available to third-party app stores for distribution, although it is allowed to give developers a way to opt-out from this—seriously casting doubt on Google's claims of security concerns and negative consequences for developers. Despite being forced to allow third-party app stores on the Play Store, Google is also allowed to charge a "reasonable" fee per download for any app downloaded via a third-party app store from the Play Store—seemingly similar to Apple's maligned Core Technology Fee.

Google has eight months to implement whatever technical capabilities are required to comply with the judgement, and the terms of the three-year injunction will start once Google has implemented all the necessary steps. As mentioned previously, Google plans to fight the judgement with an appeal, arguing that Google already competes with Apple for consumers and developers and that Android is already an open operating system with side-loading and third-party app stores permitted—although Google has made them increasingly difficult to install.

Google claims that the changes requested by Epic and granted by the ruling would make Android a weaker competitor against Apple and iOS. It also claims that the ruling goes against the precedent set by the previous US Epic-v-Apple lawsuit that levelled similar monopolistic claims at Apple but ultimately failed to force similar changes on the Cupertino tech giant.

These Epic-requested changes stem from a decision that is completely contrary to another court's rejection of similar claims Epic made against Apple—even though, unlike iOS, Android is an open platform that has always allowed for choice and flexibility like multiple app stores and sideloading.