Google is facing yet another legal battle, this time from Epic Games, the creator of the popular game Fortnite. In a new parallel legal battle, Google finds itself under the scrutiny of federal courts once again, this time facing an antitrust lawsuit brought by Epic Games, the creators of the popular video game Fortnite.
The trial, set to kick off Monday in San Francisco, is expected to last a month, and Epic Games is making a case against Google, alleging violations of state and federal antitrust laws, as well as a breach of Google’s own founding principle, “Don’t be evil” reported the New York Times.
Epic Games argues that Google is leveraging its dominant position in the online search and advertising industry to unfairly stifle competition and innovation among app developers on its Google Play Store for Android mobile phones. The video game developer filed its complaint in 2020, accusing Google of sidelining its famous motto and using its sheer size to harm competitors, innovators, customers, and users across multiple markets it has monopolized.
According to the New York Times, the legal dispute initially stemmed from Epic Games’ attempt to bypass Google Play Store fees by allowing Fortnite players to make direct in-app purchases through Epic.
In response, Google removed Fortnite from its store. If Epic Games prevails in this case, it could compel Google to revise its stringent Play Store policies, potentially allowing other companies to establish competing app stores and affording developers greater flexibility in avoiding the fees Google collects from in-app purchases. Google’s standard fees include a 15 percent charge for customer payments on app subscriptions and a 30 percent fee for in-app purchases made in apps downloaded from the Google Play Store.
These simultaneous antitrust lawsuits underscore Google’s ongoing battle on multiple legal fronts as it faces increased scrutiny from regulators and competitors seeking to diminish its influence over the internet.
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand