Epic Games wins again against Google

Epic Games has won yet another high-profile legal battle against Google. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a unanimous 2023 jury verdict last year that Google’s Google Play store and payment ecosystem is an illegal monopoly, and gave the green light to implement a permanent injunction that will open up Android to competition. Epic CEO Tim Sweeney called the victory on Xu (formerly Twitter) “a complete victory for Epic’s appeal against Google.”

The verdict and implications for Google

The three judges upheld the lower court's decision, and Google has already announced a new appeal - most likely to the US Supreme Court.

By refusing to temporarily stay the order, the court cleared the way for Judge James Donat's permanent injunction from 2024 to take effect. It requires Google to:

• to open Android to third-party app stores,
• to allow the distribution of competing stores within Google Play,
• to give competitors access to the entire catalog of applications,
• and to cease anti-competitive practices, including the mandatory use of Google Play Billing.

The order will be in effect for three years and could fundamentally reshape the Android ecosystem. Epic has already announced that the Epic Games Store will soon be available within Google Play.

Google's response

Google's global head of regulatory affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland said in a statement that the decision "will seriously compromise user security, limit choice, and weaken the innovation that is the foundation of the Android ecosystem." Google will continue to appeal while trying to keep its platform safe for users, developers, and partners.

Why Epic succeeded against Google but not Apple

Epic sued both Google and Apple in 2020 after Fortnite was removed from both stores because the company intentionally included code in the app to bypass payment systems.

While Epic largely lost in the Apple case, the situation was different with Google. The jury saw internal documents and emails that revealed:

• secret revenue-sharing agreements between Google, phone manufacturers and game developers,
• Google's fear that Epic would encourage developers to create competing stores,
• evidence that Google is actively protecting its monopoly in Android app distribution and in-app billing.

The court also rejected Google's argument that the Apple decision should affect this case. Judge M. Margaret McKeown explained that the markets for distributing Android apps and charging for them are separate from the iOS ecosystem. Apple has a "walled garden," while Google uses its openness as an excuse to restrict competition.

Google's only remaining option is to appeal to the Supreme Court, but in the meantime, Android will have to open to competitionEpic's victory will have implications for all Android developers and users, as it could lead to more stores, more choice, and less reliance on Google's terms.