Epic Games Wins 'Total Victory' in Google Play Store Dispute - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Epic Games Wins 'Total Victory' in Google Play Store Dispute

While Apple largely won the lawsuit that Epic Games levied against it back in 2020, Google hasn't been as lucky. Google today failed to win an appeal in the ongoing ‌Epic Games‌ v. Google case, handing another victory to Epic.

Google Logo Feature Slack
As noted by Reuters, a federal appeals court rejected Google's claim that the original court overseeing the antitrust case had made legal errors when finding in favor of Epic, which means Google will need to implement Play Store changes. ‌Epic Games‌ CEO Tim Sweeney said the company had scored a "total victory" in the appeal.

‌Epic Games‌ first sued Google in 2020, right around the same time that it sued Apple. In 2023, a jury unanimously agreed that Google had abused its power by operating an app store monopoly and charging developers exorbitant fees. Google then appealed, leading to today's loss.

As a result of the ‌Epic Games‌ lawsuit, Google will be forced to allow Android users to download rival app stores from the Play Store. Google will also be required to make the Play app catalog available to competitors.

Sweeney says that the ‌Epic Games‌ Store for Android will be coming to the Google Play Store, but Google plans to appeal again.

Popular Stories

iphone 17 pro dark blue 1

Apple Preparing 'Most Significant Overhaul in the iPhone's History'

Sunday March 29, 2026 8:18 am PDT by
Bloomberg's Mark Gurman has high expectations for Apple's first foldable iPhone. In his Power On newsletter today, he said the foldable iPhone will be "the most significant overhaul in the iPhone's history." "iPhone 4, iPhone 6 and iPhone X were clearly a big deal, but this is a whole new design," he said. Like Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold 7, the foldable iPhone will reportedly open up like ...
Apple Event Logo

Apple to Launch These 15+ New Products Later This Year

Friday March 27, 2026 2:03 pm PDT by
March has been an incredibly busy month for Apple, with the company unveiling more than 10 new products and accessories. We said hello to the MacBook Neo at the start of the month, and we bid farewell to the Mac Pro at the end of it. Nevertheless, there is still a lot more to come this year. Beyond the usual annual updates to iPhones and Apple Watches, Apple's all-new smart home hub is...
Apple Apps Grid

Apple Releasing Two New iPhone Apps This Year

Saturday March 28, 2026 8:00 am PDT by
Apple is expected to release two new iPhone apps this year, including an Apple Business app and a Siri app with chatbot-like functionality. With the Apple Business app, employees at businesses using the new Apple Business platform will be able to install apps for work, view contact information for colleagues, and request support. Apple Business is launching on April 14, and it replaces Apple ...

Top Rated Comments

dynamojoe Avatar
9 months ago
Next Ford dealerships will be required to give floor space to Chevrolet and Honda.
Score: 32 Votes (Like | Disagree)
9 months ago
ah so you can download a store within a store. just like how I can shop inside a Target inside a Walmart inside Amazon right? because that's what consumers really want: more complexity.

so dumb.
Score: 29 Votes (Like | Disagree)
TheDailyApple Avatar
9 months ago
Why force them to host other app stores? Can’t apps be installed outside the Google Play Store? At this rate epic should be forced to allow Steam, Xbox PC, and Ubisoft Store to be downloaded from their store. And anyone who sells their game through epic should be allowed to advertise lower priced options via direct download or alternate stores in the epic store.


Google will also be required to make the Play app catalog available to competitors.
Am I misunderstanding something here? This makes it seem like anyone can just create a new interface, charge their own fees, and profit off of google’s work.
Score: 21 Votes (Like | Disagree)
surferfb Avatar
9 months ago

If Target was the only company that owned land for the state of New York and got to dictate where, when, and how Walmart could build their stores, what they could sell, and even whether or not Walmart could build a store, we would all agree that would be bad.
Android exists. Everyone knows what they’re getting into when they buy an iPhone.



Apple in the case of the iPhone is the land owner. They control what other stores are allowed to operate and how they sell their goods or services, same with google for the most part.

Saying “just leave the iPhone” is like saying “just leave New York” in my target example.
No it’s not. Moving states is a massive effort, buying a new phone is easy.


Also there are stores within a store. Starbucks inside Target, Toys R Us inside Macys, Malls in general. I am dumbfounded why people advocate against consumer choice.
And those stores within a store pay rent, or otherwise sign agreements with store owner. They don’t get access to the other store’s customers and property for free.
Score: 17 Votes (Like | Disagree)
surferfb Avatar
9 months ago

Such a catastrophic loss for every apple owner that the Jury ruled wrong in that case. It could be a decade or longer before Apple is forced to allow the owner of the device to use it as the owner wishes.

I would like to know how they came to such a ridiculous verdict.
Wasn’t a jury, was a judge. And she ruled correctly (except, ironically, on the one part she ruled in favor of Epic on - she ruled the anti-steering provision violated California law, but a California court later said it didn’t, the appeals court agreed it didn’t. But unfortunately for Apple, they didn’t rule until after the federal case was done).

The reason Apple won and Google lost was well explained by Ben Thompson ('https://stratechery.com/2023/google-loses-antitrust-case-to-epic-the-differences-between-apple-and-google-revisited-the-tying-question/'), but it’s behind a paywall. Apologies for the long quote:



* Discovery showed extensive evidence that Google was purposely acting to limit not just Epic but other developers from launching (or joining) alternative game stores.
* One way that Google limited developers was by buying them off, i.e. investing in them directly.
* Google similarly effectively paid off OEMs to stop them from shipping with alternative stores; this payment usually took the form of Google Play revenue shares.
* Google made special deals with top app makers, including allowing Spotify to not use Google payments at all (in lieu of their own), and Netflix only needing to pay a 10% fee.
* Google offered little evidence to justify its 30% fee.

That last point may seem odd in light of Apple’s victory, but again, Apple was offering an integrated product that it fully controlled and customers were fully aware of, and is thus, under U.S. antitrust law, free to set the price of entry however it chooses. Google, on the other hand, “entered into one or more agreements that unreasonably restrained trade” — that quote is from the jury instructions, and is taken directly from the Sherman Act — by which the jurors mean basically all of them: the Google Play Developer Distribution Agreement, investment agreements under the Games Velocity Program (i.e. Project Hug), and Android’s mobile application distribution agreement and revenue share agreements with OEMs, were all ruled illegal.
Score: 16 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Justin Cymbal Avatar
9 months ago
An EPIC win for Epic
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)