Google must open Android to third-party stores, Epic judge rules

Google's Android app store is an illegal monopoly – and now that has to change.

Today, Judge James Donato issued his final verdict Epic vs Googleand ordered Google to effectively open the Google Play app store to competition for three years. Google must distribute competing third-party app stores within Google Play, and it must allow competing third-party app stores access to the full catalog of Google Play apps unless developers individually opt out.

These were Epic's biggest demands, and they could change the Android app marketplace forever – if they aren't immediately paused or blocked on appeal.

And that's not all Epic won today.

From November 1, 2024 to November 1, 2027, Google must also:

• Stop requiring Google Play Billing for apps distributed in the Google Play Store (the jury concluded that Google had illegally tied its payment system to its App Store).
• Let Android developers inform users about other payment options in the Play Store
• Allow Android developers to link to ways to download their apps outside of the Play Store
• Let Android developers set their own pricing for apps, independent of Play billing

• Share app revenue “with any person or organization that distributes Android apps” or plans to launch an app store or app platform
• Offer money or perks to developers to publish their apps exclusively or first on the Play Store
• Offer money or perks to developers not to launch their apps in competing stores
• Offer money or discounts to device manufacturers or carriers for pre-installing the Play Store
• Offer money or discounts to device manufacturers or operators not Pre-install competing shops

In Epic vs Google, Epic successfully argued that Google had entered into such an extensive series of deals with developers, carriers and device makers that it was nearly impossible for competing deals to emerge. By blocking such deals and proactively supporting competing app stores, real competition to Google's monopoly could now arise.

Google will still have some control over security as it opens the Google Play Store to competing stores. The injunction states that Google may “take appropriate measures” that are “strictly necessary and narrowly tailored” and “comparable” to the way it currently monitors the Google Play Store. Google may also charge a fee for this monitoring. Epic has repeatedly argued that Google shouldn't be able to deter third-party app stores through policing, so it's likely that Epic and Google will continue to argue about this.

Judge Donato gives Google eight months to develop a system in which a three-person technical committee, jointly selected by Epic and Google, reviews all disputes. This system also gives developers the option to opt out of listing in competing Android app stores.

Epic didn't quite get everything it asked for: it wanted the judge to open Google Play for six years, not three; Allow users to sideload apps with a single tap. and that Google is no longer able to bind Android APIs to Google Play.

Why not six years? “The provisions are intended to create a level playing field for competitors to enter and grow without placing an undue burden on Google,” Donato wrote in his order. “As competition comes into play and the network effects that Google Play unfairly enjoys diminish, Google should not be unduly restricted as a competitor.”

But Amazon, of all companies, convinced Judge Donato that Google's competitors needed a helping hand. “Even a corporate giant like Amazon couldn’t compete with the Google Play Store because of network effects,” writes Donato, citing key evidence from the trial: an internal Google presentation that suggested Amazon was using the chicken-and-egg principle would struggle to attract both users and apps. So far, the Amazon Appstore has not become a significant competitor.

But with access to Google Play's app catalog, Donato argues, competing app stores now have “a great opportunity to take off.”

Today, Google says the changes “will have a number of unintended consequences that will harm American consumers, developers and device manufacturers.” It will appeal.

Epic Games originally sued Google on August 13, 2020 – the same day it also sued Apple. The game developer deliberately set a trap for both tech giants by trying to get around their 30 percent fee on in-app purchases with a surprise update to its hugely popular game Fortnite. Both tech companies responded with kicks Fortnite from their app stores, prompting a coordinated #FreeFortnite campaign and two lawsuits accusing both of them of creating illegal monopolies.

The Apple case is already over and Apple has mostly won: the Supreme Court rejected Epic's last appeal in January of this year. The only thing Epic was able to legally enforce there was an order overturning Apple's “anti-steering rules,” which theoretically allowed developers to freely tell their customers how to bypass Apple's payment systems. (I will not discuss the Apple case in more detail than this brief overview because of ethical obligations.)

But the Google case took much longer to get off the ground, and it played out very differently. I reported live from the courtroom for 15 days and saw time and time again how Epic showed that Google was afraid, didn't treat developers equally, and had something to hide.

The jury is in Epic vs Google was deeply convinced: Last December, there was a unanimous ruling that the Google Play App Store and the Google Play Billing Service were an illegal monopoly and that many of the special contracts with game developers and phone manufacturers constituted anti-competitive behavior.

In August, Judge Donato warned that Google would pay for its behavior. “We’re going to break down the barriers, it’s just the way it’s going to happen,” he said. In remedial hearings, he rejected Google's suggestions that meeting Epic's demands would require too much work, cost too much money, or be impossible to arrange without spending a lot of time.

It is not yet clear whether Google will have to follow the court's demands immediately, even if the injunction takes effect on November 1st. Google has already promised to appeal the ruling and is now apparently seeking an immediate stay – Google says in this new blog post today that it will ask to “suspend the changes requested by Epic”.

Like Apple, Google is now hoping the appeals court will put Judge Donato's order on hold while it tries its luck again. Apple has delayed changing its anti-steering rules for years with its legal appeals.

Epic filed a second lawsuit against Google (and Samsung) a week ago, arguing that the companies were already trying to get around this upcoming injunction by creating additional tension for third-party app stores. Since this case is now officially related to this case, Judge Donato will also hear it.

You can read the full order and injunction embedded below:

Epic did not immediately respond to a request for comment.