Google Pays $700 Million to Settle Play Store Antitrust Lawsuit

[MacRumors]

Google parent company Alphabet has agreed to pay $700 million and update the Google Play app in order to settle a 2021 U.S. antitrust lawsuit over the Play Store, reports Reuters.

The United States Department of Justice and all 50 states accused Google of charging unnecessary fees for in-app purchases and restricting the distribution of apps on Android devices, resulting in higher fees for consumers.

Google will pay $630 million in restitution to customers, and $70 million into a fund that will be used by states should the settlement get final approval from a judge. Customers who purchased an app on Google Play between August 16, 2016 and September 30, 2023 will receive at least $2.

News of a settlement was announced in September, but the terms were kept under wraps to avoid impacting the Google vs. Epic Games lawsuit. Google lost that lawsuit last week after a nine-member jury unanimously agreed that Google had abused its power by operating an app store monopoly.

In addition to paying money to consumers, Google will make several changes to its Play Store under the terms of the settlement with the government. Developers will be able to pay through in-app billing systems other than Google Play Billing for at least five years, and will be able to direct consumers to non-Google billing systems by advertising cheaper prices in their apps. Google's full concessions are listed below [PDF]:

- Give all developers the ability to allow users to pay through in-app billing systems other than Google Play Billing for at least five years.
- Allow developers to offer cheaper prices for their apps and in-app products for consumers who use alternative, non-Google billing systems for at least five years.
- Permit developers to steer consumers toward alternative, non-Google billing systems by advertising cheaper prices within their apps themselves for at least five years.
- Not enter contracts that require the Play Store to be the exclusive, pre-loaded app store on a device or home screen for at least five years.
- Allow the installation of third-party apps on Android phones from outside the Google Play Store for at least seven years.
- Revise and reduce the warnings that appear on an Android device if a user attempts to download a third-party app from outside the Google Play Store for at least five years.
- Maintain Android system support for third-party app stores, including allowing automatic updates, for four years.
- Not require developers to launch their app catalogs on the Play Store at the same time as they launch on other app stores for at least four years.
- Submit compliance reports to an independent monitor who will ensure that Google is not continuing its anticompetitive conduct for at least five years.

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney today shared several tweets decrying the terms of the settlement. He said that it is an "injustice to all Android users and developers," and that the decision "endorses Google's misleading and anticompetitive scare screens."

While Google has agreed to these terms to settle the antitrust lawsuit, Epic Games will also be able to make recommendations for changes to the Play Store as part of its separate lawsuit against Google. Epic Games policy head Corie Wright told Reuters that the ruling "did not address the core of Google's unlawful and anticompetitive behavior" and that Epic Games will push to "truly open up the Android ecosystem" in the next phase of its trial.

Google plans to appeal the decision in the Epic Games case, and the company said it will "continue to defend the Android business model."

Google's settlement and loss in the Epic Games case could have implications for Apple in the future. Apple was successful in its lawsuit against Epic Games, but the company has been ordered to change its "anti-steering" rule that prevents iOS developers from directing users to make purchases outside of the App Store, circumventing Apple's 15 to 30 percent cut of in-app purchases.

Apple and Epic Games have both filed appeals in their dispute, and the Supreme Court will need decide whether to hear the case.

Article Link: Google Pays $700 Million to Settle Play Store Antitrust Lawsuit

 

[truthsteve]

$2 lmao hilarious

 

[I7guy]

Wonder what, if anything, this might mean for apple.

 

[CarAnalogy]

Remember, when you’re rich enough, a fine is just a fee to do basically whatever you want.

 

[CarAnalogy]

$2 lmao hilarious

Don’t worry. That’ll come down on appeal. Look forward to your 75 cents coming in 2026.

 

[ikir]

Tim Sweeney is an incredible hypocrite

 

[erikkfi]

How Apple gets away with fundamentally identical behavior but Google ends up on the mat is a total mystery to me. Smart phone market share without considering profits?

 

[Ricebucket]

How Apple gets away with fundamentally identical behavior but Google ends up on the mat is a total mystery to me. Smart phone market share without considering profits?

Not hard to see where the winds are blowing, not just in the US but also globally. There are too many ways people *and* governments are trying to chip away at these practices. The newest controversy over iMessage is another front in this war. (Apple's heavy-handedness in that arena will just lead to more scrutiny.)

Apple will end up having to open up in some form or another in the near future.

 

[nutmac]

Why are there time requirements? For instance, "Give all developers the ability to allow users to pay through in-app billing systems other than Google Play Billing for at least five years." So after 5 years, Google can require Google Play Billing again?

 

[Krizoitz]

and that Epic Games will push to "truly open up the Android ecosystem" in the next phase of its trial.

Epic basically wants to force Google to let it do whatever it wants and support it however Epic wants. Utterly insane that there is such a strong chance they might get their way.

 

[Krizoitz]

How Apple gets away with fundamentally identical behavior but Google ends up on the mat is a total mystery to me. Smart phone market share without considering profits?

Because it’s not the same behavior is one big reason.

 

[ghanwani]

I'm not sure whose side I should be on. I just wish there were some other viable choices of mobile OS. If there were we wouldn't have had these problems. These problems and many others arise when you allow the creation of monopolies and oligopolies.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

Wonder what, if anything, this might mean for apple.

We’ll have to wait and see, but I think these are two different situations (though Epic will argue they are the same). Apple has been consistent with their commission since day one (though dropping the rate for smaller developers). They have also been pushing hard for security and privacy, which seems to be their initial motivation for the App Store. All of these details would come out in a court case, but I don’t see the outcome being the same.

 

[lkrupp]

What’s interesting here is the constant drone of techie wannabes about side loading and third party app stores. Like iOS user,s Android users apparently prefer Google’s own app store over all the third party side loading. So is all this bellowing about side loading just a wet dream for nerds? I think it is.

 

[ChrisA]

Wonder what, if anything, this might mean for apple.

Apple's fine will be much larger than $700M and Apple will be force to open up IOS so that it is more likeMacOS in terms of the App Store.

This is very good news for everyone but Apple and Google.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Wonder what, if anything, this might mean for apple.

Almost certainly that they are also an abusive monopolist.

 

[ChrisA]

What’s interesting here is the constant drone of techie wannabes about side loading and third party app stores. Like iOS user,s Android users apparently prefer Google’s own app store over all the third party side loading. So is all this bellowing about side loading just a wet dream for nerds? I think it is.

Of course, the average IOS user does not care about this at all and does not follow the news.

I would very much like to see other ways of loading software into iPhones. I do some open-source development and don't make money from it. but I'd still like to be able to share my work with others and not have to use the app store. As it stands I can't even give my stuff away unless the other person knows how to use code and build from source. There are many use cases for opening up IOS to make it more like MacOS.

The other group is commercial developers. They hate having to give 30% of gross sales to Apple.

It seems likely now that Apple's monopoly may come to an end.

 

[Abazigal]

Wonder what, if anything, this might mean for apple.

Unless Congress gets their act together to enact new laws specifically targeting Apple, my guess is - nothing. My stance is, and always has been, that Apple has done nothing wrong as far as US antitrust law is concerned. It's not a crime to be a monopolist (let's say for argument's sake that I agree Apple is one); you still have to prove that there is harm to consumers, and Apple has been consistent since Day 1 in asserting that their walled garden is meant to be a net benefit to consumers in the form of better safety and security.

How Apple gets away with fundamentally identical behavior but Google ends up on the mat is a total mystery to me. Smart phone market share without considering profits?

Maybe because they are nothing alike.

Apple is a vertically integrated company, which amongst other things, means they have no duty to deal. Thus, Apple is under no obligation to provide access to companies who refuse to abide by their terms, and the fact remains that Epic violated the App Store terms first. The tradeoff, as we have seen, is that Apple made a conscious decision to give up market share in exchange for a smaller, albeit more profitable, segment of the market. And one that they wield near absolute, unassailable control over.

In contrast, Google was attempting to have their cake and eat it too. They wanted the benefits of an open ecosystem (ie: market share, which would benefit the proliferation of their google services and data collection), but weren't willing to deal with the downsides (eg: allowing third party app stores which would likely lead to a drop in App Store revenue).

It was also not so long ago that critics were certain Apple was "anti-competing" itself into the ground, that they needed to open up or get crowded out by Android. Fast forward 10 years and guess who had the superior business model after all?

My takeaway from all this is that Apple was right, and had always been right.

 

[jayducharme]

Almost certainly that they are also an abusive monopolist.

How so? If you don't like the Apple desktop ecosystem, there's Windows along with Linux variants. If you don't like the Apple mobile ecosystem, there's Android, Harmony and Tizen (not to mention all the different Android customizations). If you DO like the Apple ecosystem, maybe they're doing something right.

 

[Apple Fan 2008]

How was this even a case? Android literally lets you install third party app stores.

 

[webkit]

Why are there time requirements? For instance, "Give all developers the ability to allow users to pay through in-app billing systems other than Google Play Billing for at least five years." So after 5 years, Google can require Google Play Billing again?

Market conditions can change e.g., new technologies, new competitors, Google not as dominant, etc. Where things are in five years may be very different than today.

 

[dampfnudel]

Looks like both Apple and Google got a lump of coal in their stockings.

 

[Abazigal]

How was this even a case? Android literally lets you install third party app stores.

Imagine if you claim to believe in free and open elections, while going behind everyone's backs to bribe voters and redraw electoral boundaries to rig the poll results in your favour.

That's what Android is being found guilty of here. Them promising a completely open platform on one hand, while paying developers to not develop third party app stores on the other.

 

[wigby]

Google parent company Alphabet has agreed to pay $700 million and update the Google Play app in order to settle a 2021 U.S. antitrust lawsuit over the Play Store, reports Reuters.

The United States Department of Justice and all 50 states accused Google of charging unnecessary fees for in-app purchases and restricting the distribution of apps on Android devices, resulting in higher fees for consumers.

Google will pay $630 million in restitution to customers, and $70 million into a fund that will be used by states should the settlement get final approval from a judge. Customers who purchased an app on Google Play between August 16, 2016 and September 30, 2023 will receive at least $2.

News of a settlement was announced in September, but the terms were kept under wraps to avoid impacting the Google vs. Epic Games lawsuit. Google lost that lawsuit last week after a nine-member jury unanimously agreed that Google had abused its power by operating an app store monopoly.

In addition to paying money to consumers, Google will make several changes to its Play Store under the terms of the settlement with the government. Developers will be able to pay through in-app billing systems other than Google Play Billing for at least five years, and will be able to direct consumers to non-Google billing systems by advertising cheaper prices in their apps. Google's full concessions are listed below [PDF]:

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney today shared several tweets decrying the terms of the settlement. He said that it is an "injustice to all Android users and developers," and that the decision "endorses Google's misleading and anticompetitive scare screens."

While Google has agreed to these terms to settle the antitrust lawsuit, Epic Games will also be able to make recommendations for changes to the Play Store as part of its separate lawsuit against Google. Epic Games policy head Corie Wright told Reuters that the ruling "did not address the core of Google's unlawful and anticompetitive behavior" and that Epic Games will push to "truly open up the Android ecosystem" in the next phase of its trial.

Google plans to appeal the decision in the Epic Games case, and the company said it will "continue to defend the Android business model."

Google's settlement and loss in the Epic Games case could have implications for Apple in the future. Apple was successful in its lawsuit against Epic Games, but the company has been ordered to change its "anti-steering" rule that prevents iOS developers from directing users to make purchases outside of the App Store, circumventing Apple's 15 to 30 percent cut of in-app purchases.

Apple and Epic Games have both filed appeals in their dispute, and the Supreme Court will need decide whether to hear the case.

Article Link: Google Pays $700 Million to Settle Play Store Antitrust Lawsuit

Something smaller than a slap on the wrist could be a "gentle reprimand" or a "mild admonishment." - ChatGPT

 

[amartinez1660]

I don’t envy any of the shoes of all the involved in this… after a few decades and major waste of time, while inching closer to their deathbeds, the major achievement in their life will be some sort of “we appealed on the legalese of this and that and we were waiting for a hearing”, “back door settlement here”, “secret agreement there”, etc

All of this Google, Apple, Epic, EU, etc conundrum has lasted so long already that it feels like very old news, and it seems that it will continue stalling forward, as if there’s no interest in culminating it… heck maybe when it does culminate, maybe there’s no more smartphones and AppStore’s