![](https://www.pymnts.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/shutterstock_1785457652-e1613640393998-1.jpg)
A California jury ruled on Monday that the Play app store, owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet, operated as an illegal monopoly. The decision opens the door for potential changes in the Android mobile system, but experts caution that a lengthy appeals process could delay any alterations for years.
The jury’s verdict stated that Google’s Play Store hindered competition by imposing exorbitant fees of up to 30% on app developers, marking a stunning defeat for the company. This ruling grants Epic Games, the maker of “Fortnite,” an opportunity to submit a court filing outlining its vision for fixing the Play Store.
Pinar Akman, a professor of competition law at the University of Leeds, remarked, “This is a big win for Epic.” She suggested that a typical remedy could involve requiring Google to allow developers to use payment systems other than its own, potentially shaking up the entire ecosystem and business model.
Related: Epic & Match’s Antitrust Case Against Google Heads To Jury Trial November
Wells Fargo estimates that Google could face a significant financial impact, with approximately $10 billion in annual revenue from app sales and in-app purchases at risk. The current situation may force Google to reconsider its high-margin business model, where it takes a substantial cut from each digital purchase through the Play Store on Android.
Analysts speculate that potential remedies could compel Google to permit rival app stores or reduce the fees associated with app sales and in-app purchases. While digital purchase revenue represents only a fraction of Google’s total sales, the high-margin nature of this business segment underscores the importance of the legal implications on the tech giant’s financial landscape.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
EU Industry Chief Warns Elon Musk to Comply with EU Law Ahead of Trump Interview on X
Aug 12, 2024 by
CPI
US Judge Dismisses Antitrust Suit Against Google, but Consumers May Get Another Chance
Aug 12, 2024 by
CPI
Objections Raised Against Landmark $2.7 Billion NCAA Settlement
Aug 12, 2024 by
CPI
Orrick Strengthens Antitrust and Competition Practice with New Partner Hire in London
Aug 12, 2024 by
CPI
Austrian Group NOYB Files GDPR Complaint Against X Over AI Data Use
Aug 12, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Editorial Board Antipasto
Aug 8, 2024 by
CPI
EU Antitrust Enforcement in Labor Markets – A Little Less Conversation and a Little More Action
Aug 8, 2024 by
CPI
The Talent Trap: Acqui-Hires and Non-Competes from an Antitrust Perspective
Aug 8, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange – Pitfalls from Recent Case Law and Enforcement Practice, and How to Avoid Them
Aug 8, 2024 by
CPI
The American Express Decision and its Critics
Aug 8, 2024 by
CPI