Google Calls Epic’s Antitrust Win Demands ‘Unnecessary’ and ‘Beyond Scope

Google Pushes Back Against Epic Games’ Proposed Remedies in Antitrust Case

The Aftermath of the Jury’s Decision

In the wake of a court ruling that found Google engaged in anticompetitive practices on its Play Store, the tech giant is resisting the numerous proposed remedies put forth by Fortnite creator Epic Games. The two sides recently presented their arguments to the court regarding how Google should be required to alter its conduct in response to the verdict. Epic Games had previously issued an extensive list of demands, which included gaining access to the Play Store’s app and game catalog for six years, the ability to distribute its own app store on Google Play without fees, and the elimination of agreements, incentives, deals, and penalties that could give the Play Store or Google Play Billing an advantage over competitors.

Contrasting Outcomes in Epic’s Battles with Tech Giants

Google’s unexpected and swift defeat in this case was a landmark decision, particularly considering that Epic Games had largely lost a similar antitrust case against Apple, which was not tried by a jury. In the Epic-Apple lawsuit, the court determined that Apple was not a monopolist but agreed that developers should be allowed to direct their customers to alternative payment methods via the web. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which declined to hear it, upholding the lower court’s decision.

The Next Steps in the Google Case

Although the jury in the Google case was persuaded that the tech giant used its market power illegally, it is up to the judge to decide the next steps. The recent filing by Google, along with Epic’s proposal, will assist Judge James Donato in determining what actions to take to curb Google’s power during a hearing scheduled for May 23.

Epic Games’ Demands and Proposed Injunction

In April, Epic Games outlined its demands in a proposed injunction, which can be found here. The company wants Google to allow users to download apps from any app store or the web, prevent Google from blocking or coercing OEMs or carriers to favor Google Play, and eliminate additional fees for bypassing the Play Store. Furthermore, Epic seeks access to the Play Store catalog to perform app updates without warning screens or extra fees, and wants developers to be able to inform users about alternative payment methods and potential savings. It also aims to remove the requirement to use Google’s “User Choice Billing,” which offers only a small discount to developers who process payments themselves.

Google’s Response and Counterarguments

Google, as expected, disagrees with Epic’s proposed remedies. In a statement, Google Vice President of Government Affairs & Public Policy Wilson White described Epic’s demands as overreaching and unnecessary:

“Epic’s demands would harm the privacy, security, and overall experience of consumers, developers, and device manufacturers. Not only does their proposal go far beyond the scope of the recent U.S. trial verdict — which we will be challenging — it’s also unnecessary due to the settlement we reached last year with state attorneys general from every state and multiple territories. We will continue to vigorously defend our right to a sustainable business model that enables us to keep people safe, partner with developers to innovate and grow their businesses, and maintain a thriving Android ecosystem for everyone.”

In the injunction filed Thursday in a U.S. District Court in California, Google contends that Epic’s demands jeopardize users’ security and privacy by removing its ability to implement trust and safety measures for third-party app stores. The company also argues that it would be forced to share users’ installed apps with all third-party app stores without consent, potentially exposing sensitive personal information without regulations on how that data could be used.

Google further asserts that Epic is requesting the removal of safeguards around sideloading apps. Additionally, the company points out that the proposed remedies are unnecessary due to its settlement with state attorneys general, which prohibits it from signing broad exclusivity agreements with developers. Epic’s proposal, according to Google, would also prevent it from collaborating with developers to offer exclusive content through Play Store apps, which it considers a crucial opportunity for developers.

The Significance of the Upcoming Decision

The judge’s impending decision on the remedy in this case will be closely watched, as it will establish a precedent for how app stores deemed monopolists will be required to make concessions to foster competition. Although Epic lost its battle with Apple, the Justice Department’s ongoing cases against both Apple and Google over alleged monopolies in their respective markets will play a crucial role in determining the extent to which tech giants’ power will remain unchecked, given the absence of legislation in the U.S. to curb tech monopolies.