Key Points:
- Epic v. Google, a lawsuit that took place on app-distribution-on-Android, proved Epic’s desire for side-skirting-of-platform fees and seeking alternative payment methods.
- Although Epic’s victory in the lawsuit against Google with the result having been interpreted as a game-changing moment, the implementation of the decision like other court cases is a complex matter.
- In the view of Google, who determined that Epic’s request was “unnecessary,” the appellate proceedings seem to be more of a “battleground” and reveal the sides’ negotiation styles.
However, Epic has been steadily working to waive fees since its birth, despite rivals Apple and Google who have popularized alternative payment systems. Although it lost the round against Apple but it got a better result later when it stood firm in the dispute with Google. A seminal court session in December 2021 acknowledged Google’s dominance in Android app distribution, along with the possibility of further growth, leading people to speculate on the latter scenario.
After all, even after the epic victory in the court, the fight is not over. Such a fight ended with a final statement from our side which was immediately responded to by Google by mid-May. The plaintiffs and defendants will present their cases before Judge James Donato at a preliminary hearing on May 23, with a ruling to be announced shortly thereafter.
The nature of Google’s statement left nothing to the imagination; It described the harshness of Epic’s request as excessive and reiterated its desire to appeal the court’s decision. Google’s vice president of government and public policy, run by Wilson White, refuted Epic’s comments with a simple opinion that they were beyond the scope of the test.
Epic Games’ ambitions for a harmonic transformation of the Google Play Store mirror the struggle for uniformity among download platforms like the Apple App Store. Despite them looking and sounding very harsh, the tactics adopted by Epic are a typical strategy adopted by those involved in negotiations, which aims to aim high so that when concessions are made, they are somewhat favorable.
However no matter the outcome, Epic is still moving forward with overhauling the entire system, clearly showing that they are in it for more than just the money. The merit of this complex situation is evidenced by the fact that Epic’s decision to challenge the authority of powerful large holders will change the market paradigm as it is now.
