Epic Wins Store Spat Against Google, Jury Holds Google Play Guilty of Monopolistic Practices

[btarunr]

Epic Games won a pivotal anti-trust dispute against industry giant Google, with a Jury holding Google Play and its billing service guilty of running an illegal monopoly for the sale of software and digital assets. Epic had sued both Google and Apple of running restrictive, walled-garden marketplaces on their mobile platforms, which forced people to buy, subscribe, or pay for its products only through their marketplaces, namely Google Play and the App Store, after gouging huge revenue shares. Epic had sought to release its own marketplace, the Epic Games Store, on these platforms, so it could sell its wares just the way it does on the PC. With this favorable verdict, Epic stands to save "hundreds of millions or even billions of Dollars" in fees to Google. Meanwhile, Google stated that it is preparing to appeal in a higher court, on the basis that the Play Store isn't the only software/content marketplace, and that it is competing with Apple's App Store (although not on the same devices).



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[GooseMoose]

"and that it is competing with Apple's App Store (although not on the same devices)."
Sounds like that's not really competition

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
One of them will be overturned on appeal google or apple
Apple I hope.

Guess there was no conspiracy on apple's side.

 

[Vayra86]

Well done. Apple's next.

The power of Big Tech needs to erode ASAP and this is part of it. Progress.

 

[Chaitanya]

Google needs to be broken up given their stranglehold on online advertisement, search engine, mobile OS, web browser and online video hosting platform(Youtube). Good to see Epic finally taking a massive win.

 

[sethmatrix7]

Yes! I can't wait for the epic store to put ads on my phone just like it does on my computer if I leave it open! This is progress!

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

I'm not certain this improves the marketplace so much as it improves the cash balance for Epic. I am wary when the customer can suddenly dictate how the owner does business.

Moving discussion over here to prevent too many duplicate threads:

Epic's position vs other distribution methods is one of market penetration. It cannot afford to overprice its products; it must ensure that it is competitive against other stores. This is one method of ensuring that - increase cash flow from its in-house IP (give less to middlemen) and use that to support storefront costs.

 

[GhostRyder]

I am a big supporter of this ruling and I hope to see more like this (unless I see something that changes my mind). Both these companies have gotten too big and restrictive especially when it comes to there respective app stores. I generally am a supporter of letting the market control things like this, however both companies seem to just be copying each other and at this point there is almost no chance another competitor to the phone market can step in. I mean technically their marketplaces on their respective platforms are monopolies so I will be curious how the higher courts see it down the road.

 

[thesmokingman]

Good stuff, fk Google and Apple. Apple still showing they care by walling off text messaging lmao, how does shit like this keep happening?

I am a big supporter of this ruling and I hope to see more like this (unless I see something that changes my mind). Both these companies have gotten too big and restrictive especially when it comes to there respective app stores. I generally am a supporter of letting the market control things like this, however both companies seem to just be copying each other and at this point there is almost no chance another competitor to the phone market can step in. I mean technically their marketplaces on their respective platforms are monopolies so I will be curious how the higher courts see it down the road.

Collusion...

 

[Vayra86]

Yes! I can't wait for the epic store to put ads on my phone just like it does on my computer if I leave it open! This is progress!

Wait... you actually BOUGHT things in the Epic store?

 

[sethmatrix7]

Wait... you actually BOUGHT things in the Epic store?

heeeeeelll no

I acquired Civ 6 for free

 

[Pumper]

Well done. Apple's next.

The power of Big Tech needs to erode ASAP and this is part of it. Progress.

Pretty sure Apple already won the same lawsuit.

 

[Vayra86]

Pretty sure Apple already won the same lawsuit.

Nah that wasn't the exact same situation or lawsuit and with the precedent for Google now, things might have changed, also time is a factor, perspectives change.

Note also that the EU is also still looking at similar cases, this story isn't over, far from it.

 

[trsttte]

I don't want to defend google, they're clearly in the wrong, but damn, how the in hell did Apple win their lawsuit???

So google is monopolistic for paying incentives (aka bribes) so other companies don't develop their own app stores - but you still can install whatever the fuck you want with a simple option clearly accessible - whereas with apple you can't install shit, even if you're a developer you need to pay for the privilege and renew the few installs you can do at the same time every 2 weeks. No ifs or buts!

This shit is ridiculous.

Well done. Apple's next.

The power of Big Tech needs to erode ASAP and this is part of it. Progress.

Apple was first and they won the most relevant parts!

Nah that wasn't the exact same situation or lawsuit and with the precedent for Google now, things might have changed, also time is a factor, perspectives change.

It was the same thing with extras, because Apple banned epic from the appstore all together.

 

[Chrispy_]

There are no winners here. Apple, Google, Epic are all asshole corporations who value you as money piñatas with no freedom or rights.

 

[Vayra86]

I don't want to defend google, they're clearly in the wrong, but damn, how the in hell did Apple win their lawsuit???

So google is monopolistic for paying incentives (aka bribes) so other companies don't develop their own app stores - but you still can install whatever the fuck you want with a simple option clearly accessible - whereas with apple you can't install shit, even if you're a developer you need to pay for the privilege and renew the few installs you can do at the same time every 2 weeks. No ifs or buts!

This shit is ridiculous.



Apple was first and they won the most relevant parts!



It was the same thing with extras, because Apple banned epic from the appstore all together.

Its an interesting set of cases.

Wikipedia has the details, and what struck me is this one:

Epic Games v. Apple - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Legal review of the cases identify the key issue is whether Apple's control of the iOS App Store is a monopoly or not. Epic Games has argued that Apple maintains a monopoly for iOS-enabled devices, and thus its behavior in restricting alternative payment systems and storefronts are anticompetitive. Apple contends that the marketplace that Epic participates in is multiple platforms, not just the iOS, and in that perspective, Apple does not have a monopoly.[13][14]

Now, let's consider that, in light of what happened in the Google case. If the judge had let Google win... what would be the effect? Effectively, Sweeney would still be bound to a 30% revenue cut and would even have to allow that to extend to in app purchases (one of the focus points in these cases is the ability to offer your own payment service within apps). Effectively, then, Apple and Google would be able to determine between themselves that 30% is the new norm. That's not a healthy market right there. That's a cartel.

There are no longer any ways out of this if you ask me. If the rules count for Google, they also do count for Apple, and when taken together, its the only possible outcome or you can't possibly defend that we have a system that tries to preserve healthy market conditions.

It just takes a bit long to figure that out, but this will happen, because now Google is facing unfair competitive position versus Apple

 

[GhostRyder]

Good stuff, fk Google and Apple. Apple still showing they care by walling off text messaging lmao, how does shit like this keep happening?


Collusion...

Oh no doubt, big tech companies are talking to each other and colluding (Hence why we see so many major decisions to ban or remove something happen across all platform at the same time). I think we do need to bring them in line.

Its an interesting set of cases.

Wikipedia has the details, and what struck me is this one:

Epic Games v. Apple - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Legal review of the cases identify the key issue is whether Apple's control of the iOS App Store is a monopoly or not. Epic Games has argued that Apple maintains a monopoly for iOS-enabled devices, and thus its behavior in restricting alternative payment systems and storefronts are anticompetitive. Apple contends that the marketplace that Epic participates in is multiple platforms, not just the iOS, and in that perspective, Apple does not have a monopoly.[13][14]

Now, let's consider that, in light of what happened in the Google case. If the judge had let Google win... what would be the effect? Effectively, Sweeney would still be bound to a 30% revenue cut and would even have to allow that to extend to in app purchases (one of the focus points in these cases is the ability to offer your own payment service within apps). Effectively, then, Apple and Google would be able to determine between themselves that 30% is the new norm. That's not a healthy market right there. That's a cartel.

There are no longer any ways out of this if you ask me. If the rules count for Google, they also do count for Apple, and when taken together, its the only possible outcome or you can't possibly defend that we have a system that tries to preserve healthy market conditions.

It just takes a bit long to figure that out, but this will happen, because now Google is facing unfair competitive position versus Apple

Hmm, I had not read (Or could be I forgot) that apple had already been on the block for this. That is an interesting defense, I mean its weird to me mostly because iOS is totally locked down so its a weird take to say that just because epic is on Windows that its ok for Apple to lock down apple products. I will be curious to see if this ruling and later ones change.

 

[Selaya]

oh wow.
captain obvious has spoken, ig.

 

[ThrashZone]

Its an interesting set of cases.

Wikipedia has the details, and what struck me is this one:

Epic Games v. Apple - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Legal review of the cases identify the key issue is whether Apple's control of the iOS App Store is a monopoly or not. Epic Games has argued that Apple maintains a monopoly for iOS-enabled devices, and thus its behavior in restricting alternative payment systems and storefronts are anticompetitive. Apple contends that the marketplace that Epic participates in is multiple platforms, not just the iOS, and in that perspective, Apple does not have a monopoly.[13][14]

Now, let's consider that, in light of what happened in the Google case. If the judge had let Google win... what would be the effect? Effectively, Sweeney would still be bound to a 30% revenue cut and would even have to allow that to extend to in app purchases (one of the focus points in these cases is the ability to offer your own payment service within apps). Effectively, then, Apple and Google would be able to determine between themselves that 30% is the new norm. That's not a healthy market right there. That's a cartel.

There are no longer any ways out of this if you ask me. If the rules count for Google, they also do count for Apple, and when taken together, its the only possible outcome or you can't possibly defend that we have a system that tries to preserve healthy market conditions.

It just takes a bit long to figure that out, but this will happen, because now Google is facing unfair competitive position versus Apple

Hi,
Google got caught fixing the game with backroom deals stopping competing attempts
Apple hasn't stopped anyone from opening a alternative store "doubt it's worth it" google did "much larger user base" , there's your difference in judgements.

 

[JohH]

And the key failure here, which we should remember, is that "we" (the various administration's bureaucrats at the time) allowed Google to acquire YouTube after Google Videos flopped. That we allowed Google to acquire Android Incorporated. That we allowed Google to acquire DoubleClick. Google's monopoly positions in some markets are a result of acquiring their competition, not their competency. Android won over Windows Mobile and BlackBerry by being generally better but they also used their control over YouTube and other Google services to break their competition.

I argue that the government should not have allowed that acquisition of YouTube and DoubleClick. Or at least have put a lot of scrutiny into these acquisitions. Google's monopoly of their application store is merely monkey-see-monkey-do copying of Apple's infinite revenue stream. Allowing Apple to get away with it but not Google will be disastrous. But unfortunately, I suspect future appeals will let both get away with it.

 

[Vayra86]

Hi,
Google got caught fixing the game with backroom deals stopping competing attempts
Apple hasn't stopped anyone from opening a alternative store "doubt it's worth it" google did "much larger user base" , there's your difference in judgements.

Yeah certainly there are differences and there are many different angles to approach this too.

I'm just giving my take of what's been done so far and how that might evolve.

 

[Franzen4Real]

Apple contends that the marketplace that Epic participates in is multiple platforms, not just the iOS, and in that perspective, Apple does not have a monopoly.[13][14]

Effectively, then, Apple and Google would be able to determine between themselves that 30% is the new norm. That's not a healthy market right there. That's a cartel.

There are no longer any ways out of this if you ask me. If the rules count for Google, they also do count for Apple, and when taken together, its the only possible outcome or you can't possibly defend that we have a system that tries to preserve healthy market conditions.

I'm having troubles understanding. So in a real world scenario-- I download Fortnite from Google Store/App store. My understanding was that Epic is suing because if I now want to buy Fortnite skins, I can only do so through the Google Play/App store. Epic feels that once Fortnite is downloaded from either store that they should have the ability to sell skins for their own game direct through the Epic store as an option to buying through Google Play/App Store and in turn pay 30% on every sale. Am I correct on this, or is this an incomplete take?

I can follow why Google was ruled against, and I agree with it. What I can not understand is how Apple did not lose based on this--
Apple contends that the marketplace that Epic participates in is multiple platforms, not just the iOS, and in that perspective, Apple does not have a monopoly.

Regardless of what other platforms Epic participates, it still is not changing the fact that I can only buy Fortnite skins exclusively from the App Store.... which was the whole point of the lawsuit. I feel like I must be wrong in my initial understanding of the case, otherwise Google would not have lost here.

----also-- I do not buy Fortnite skins, I just needed an example to get through all of the legal talk.

That is an interesting defense, I mean its weird to me mostly because iOS is totally locked down so its a weird take to say that just because epic is on Windows that its ok for Apple to lock down apple products. I will be curious to see if this ruling and later ones change.

 

[Vayra86]

I'm having troubles understanding. So in a real world scenario-- I download Fortnite from Google Store/App store. My understanding was that Epic is suing because if I now want to buy Fortnite skins, I can only do so through the Google Play/App store. Epic feels that once Fortnite is downloaded from either store that they should have the ability to sell skins for their own game direct through the Epic store as an option to buying through Google Play/App Store and in turn pay 30% on every sale. Am I correct on this, or is this an incomplete take?

I can follow why Google was ruled against, and I agree with it. What I can not understand is how Apple did not lose based on this--
Apple contends that the marketplace that Epic participates in is multiple platforms, not just the iOS, and in that perspective, Apple does not have a monopoly.

Regardless of what other platforms Epic participates, it still is not changing the fact that I can only buy Fortnite skins exclusively from the App Store.... which was the whole point of the lawsuit. I feel like I must be wrong in my initial understanding of the case, otherwise Google would not have lost here.

There are a few factors in the Google case that make matters worse and solidify the picture of a monopolist doing bad things, such as blocking start ups.

 

[ThrashZone]

Yeah certainly there are differences and there are many different angles to approach this too.

I'm just giving my take of what's been done so far and how that might evolve.

Hi,
Think this thread is the better

EGS Official Statement "Epic vs. Google Trial Verdict a Win for All Developers"

No comment, will hopefully be tolerated by site staff. :) https://www.epicgames.com/site/en-US/news/epic-v-google-trial-verdict-a-win-for-all-developers Today’s verdict is a win for all app developers and consumers around the world. It proves that Google’s app store practices are illegal and...

www.techpowerup.com

 

[Easo]

We can add couple of more years of court proceedings while they appeal/move to new instances. In the meantime nothing will change.