US court:

Google must open Play Store to competition

The Group has until July 1, 2025 to implement the agreement, after which it is to remain open for three years.

(Bild: PixieMe - stock.adobe.com)

The US judiciary has ordered the internet giant Google to allow competition on its app marketplace Google Play in future. In his order published in San Francisco on Monday, Judge James Donato gave the company eight months from November 1 to implement this requirement.

Donato's order follows a court ruling in December last year, when Google lost an antitrust case against US video game developer Epic Games. In the proceedings, it was determined that Google had formed an illegal monopoly with its app marketplace and the payment system there.

Among other things, the plaintiffs objected to the fees that the company, with its monopoly position, charges companies and developers who offer their apps on Google Play. Monday's decision, which is due to come into force on November 1, requires Google to change its Android operating system and app marketplace so that other providers can access it.

Epic boss expects domino effect
The company has until July 1, 2025 to implement the changes, after which the opening will last for three years. Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney explained that his company will launch its own app store next year, which, unlike Google, will not charge a 30 percent fee. This will only be launched in the USA, as Monday's decision only affects US territory. "The legal battle over the rules will continue around the world," said Sweeney.

Google announces appeal
In an initial statement, Google warned of risks to user privacy and security. At the same time, the company announced that it would appeal against the Californian judge's order. The order must remain suspended until a final decision has been made by the court.

The Google Group is facing several lawsuits in the USA and the European Union, in many cases for alleged violations of antitrust law. In a trial that began in early September, the US government is accusing the company of dominating the advertising technology business and suppressing competition by creating a monopoly.