In a landmark decision issued on Thursday, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a 2023 jury verdict and a permanent injunction in the high-profile case of Epic Games, Inc. v. Google LLC. The court found Google guilty of violating federal and California antitrust laws by maintaining monopoly power over Android app distribution and in-app billing services. Judge M. Margaret McKeown, writing for a unanimous panel, upheld the district court's decisions and dismissed all procedural challenges raised by Google.

The appellate court firmly rejected Google's attempt to draw parallels between this case and its previous litigation against Apple. It highlighted the distinct market conditions pertaining to Google’s Android operating system, which allows licensing, unlike Apple's integrated iOS system. The court noted that Epic Games had presented new, Android-specific market definitions, focusing on barriers such as default settings, security prompts, and agreements with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) that affect app store competition.

Epic Games, a major player in the video game industry known for its hit title "Fortnite," initiated the lawsuit in 2020 after Google removed the game from the Google Play Store. This action was in response to Epic implementing "Project Liberty," a direct-billing mechanism that circumvented Google Play Billing, thereby avoiding the 30% commission typically levied by Google on in-app purchases. In December 2023, the jury concluded that Google had unlawfully tied its Play Store to its proprietary billing system and engaged in monopolistic practices.

Further to the jury's findings, in October 2024, the district court issued a permanent injunction compelling Google to alter its contractual practices. This included provisions to allow sideloading and other app stores better access to the Play Store's app catalog, and to distribute apps through the Play Store under reasonable security measures. The court emphasized that these remedies were essential to mitigate the anticompetitive effects identified during the trial.

The Ninth Circuit also addressed Google’s concerns about the nationwide scope of the injunction, clarifying that it was consistent with traditional antitrust equity principles and did not violate recent Supreme Court opinions on such matters. Moreover, the appellate court supported the injunction’s pricing provisions, which require Google to charge only reasonable, cost-based fees to rival app stores utilizing Play Store infrastructure. This measure aims to prevent Google from circumventing the injunction through excessive pricing.

This affirmation by the Ninth Circuit marks another significant victory for Epic Games and sets a precedent for how antitrust laws are applied to major tech companies in the digital marketplace. It underscores the judiciary's role in addressing and rectifying monopolistic practices that can stifle competition and innovation.