1570

Well, I’ll be damned. They finally won one it sounds like.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] helenslunch@feddit.nl 173 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I don't understand. Android already allows other apps and app stores to be installed, and Epic already has an Android app store you can download and install without issue. What was the argument here?

Edit: tldr: apparently it is not good enough for Epic to have their own app store, they want to have their app in Google's app store and still not pay them money for purchases made in the app.

Google paid off other OEMs to make Google Play the default app store (much like they paid off other companies to be the default search engine) which the court decided was anticompetitive.

[-] Aatube@kbin.social 38 points 9 months ago

But Epic v. Google turned out to be a very different case. It hinged on secret revenue sharing deals between Google, smartphone makers, and big game developers, ones that Google execs internally believed were designed to keep rival app stores down. It showed that Google was running scared of Epic specifically. And it was all decided by a jury, unlike the Apple ruling.

[-] helenslunch@feddit.nl 10 points 9 months ago

I read that but they don't expand at all on how they're doing that. I can buy, download and install games from EGS right now on my Android phone...

I can also buy things from Amazon or any other online store from my browser without Google Play.

[-] Aatube@kbin.social 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

They obviously aren't forcing everyone to use Google billing, but it seems like an antitrust case gains a lot more ground if the accused pays money to quite a bit of people to prevent them from using competitors. That's what's getting Google here, apparently, not real forcing.

[-] bigFab@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago

On top of what Aatube says about secret unfair deals, Google's Play Store is necessary to run essential social services. In my case I need it to download my banking app and to sign into my university's online studies.

[-] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Even something as simple as the Wikipedia app checks to see if Google Play Services is installed and running before it'll let you use it.

[-] tabular@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Needing an app to sign into uni

Jesus fucking hell. Bet it's propriety.

[-] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 14 points 9 months ago

Need an app to configure good ol' eduroam wifi too, but that one's on F-Droid at least

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

Need an app to configure good ol' eduroam wifi too

I'm pretty sure you don't, or at least didn't, it's just much more of a hassle to configure

[-] Johanno@feddit.de 6 points 9 months ago

In theory you don't. In practice I couldn't get working with the 6 page step for step tutorial.

It is almost impossible to get it working without the app.

[-] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

Ah, well in that case, even better

[-] Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

But that won't necessarily change with this ruling right? Your government doesn't need to change how their apps function because of this.

[-] bigFab@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I really hope you'r wrong on that. Anyways, it's a pleasure to see Google bleeding.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 25 points 9 months ago

Phone makers weren’t allowed to include other app stores by default

[-] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 40 points 9 months ago

The Galaxy store app on my phone says otherwise.

[-] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 14 points 9 months ago

The Galaxy Store was a special exception made for Samsung. Generally, Google is pretty "persuasive" about being the only pre-installed app store on the phone.

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 7 points 9 months ago

What's in the contract between Google and Samsung? What exactly are the conditions for including both stores? Can any phone manufacturer get the same deal? What are the requirements for licensing Android? What number of phones on the market don't include Play Store by default? What % of applications are only in Play Store?

Monopoly is not about exceptions but about market control. Until you know what companies have to do to use Android and function on the market you can't really tell if it's monopoly or not.

[-] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 10 points 9 months ago

I have to imagine the contract that Samsung has is "We're Samsung. We basically ARE Korean technology. We can build our own mobile OS if we want to and cut you out entirely. That's a lot of spying on customers you wouldn't get to do. We get our own app store or we walk. Oh look, LG just exited the smart phone market. Do what must be done."

[-] helenslunch@feddit.nl 0 points 9 months ago

What's in the contract between Google and Samsung?

Samsung uses Google's OS (or a fork of it anyway). One of the conditions in the ToS of using that for commercial purposes is that you have to have a certain number of Google apps and services installed and not removable.

[-] Voyajer@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago

Does the Amazon store, Galaxy Store, AppGallery, Mi GetApps, and AOPPO app market not exist?

[-] Rose@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago

“Impairment means something is there, it’s being used, it just isn’t as good. Prevented means you shut it down.”

Epic’s expert Bernheim argues that Google’s expert Gentzkow “ignores four critical aspects of Google’s conduct,” including:

  1. Google impairs competition without preventing it entirely

  2. Google’s conduct targets comeptition as it emerges

  3. Google is dominant

  4. Google shares its Play profits with its competitors

“When push came to shove, he talked about whether competition is prevented” rather than impaired, says Bernheim.

The upshot of that: Bernheim believes Epic doesn’t need to prove Google actually blocked competition entirely. In his opinion (for Epic), Epic only needs to show there were no good alternatives to Google Play and Google Play Billing. It doesn’t need to show there were no alternatives at all.

For example, says Bernheim, Gentzkow presented a chart titled “Was Fortnite Blocked?” showing that revenue tanked on Google Play after the app was kicked off the store, but didn’t tank for Android phones that got Fortnite a different way.

But “If off-Google Play was a good substitute for Google Play, you’d see when one drops, the other goes up commensurably.” That didn’t happen: demand stayed stable outside of Play, according to the bar graph we just saw. “There’s no indication that any of the people here are substituting to off-Google Play.”

[-] OscarRobin@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago

Google effectively has a monopoly on the Android app ecosystem and this trial brought to light mountains of evidence that they maintain this through extremely anti-competitive means.

[-] Steve@communick.news 0 points 9 months ago

None of those are allowed on the Play Store. And when you try to side load an app, it warns you about it being dangerous.

[-] helenslunch@feddit.nl 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

They're not disallowed on the Play Store. They just choose not to put them there specifically because they don't want to pay Google 30%.

But that's not what we're discussing. We're discussing 3rd party app stores. Computers have had warnings about installing software since the beginning of computers, since no one has vetted whether it is malicious (not that the app stores are immune from malicious apps) so I don't see that as an issue. I would see mandating the removal of those warnings as an issue.

[-] Steve@communick.news 9 points 9 months ago

The Play Store doesn't allow other app stores.
"4.5 You may not use Google Play to distribute or make available any Product that has a purpose that facilitates the distribution of software applications and games for use on Android devices outside of Google Play." - Google Play Developer Distribution Agreement

Computers have had warnings about installing software since the beginning of computers

I think "Computers" go back way farther than you're imagining. There was a time when you didn't even install software on computers. You just put in a disk and ran what was on it. We don't even need to go back to when "Computer" was an actual job title. Something that humans (mostly women) did.

[-] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 9 months ago

The Play Store doesn't allow other app stores.

...huh? Why would there be an app store inside an app store?

I think "Computers" go back way farther than you're imagining.

No I was just speaking simply. You know what I meant.

[-] Steve@communick.news 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

...huh? Why would there be an app store inside an app store?

To make it easy to access other app stores of course. You can use one web browser to download another can't you.

No I was just speaking simply. You know what I meant.

Maybe too simply, because I really don't. Windows didn't give any warnings about installing any programs until Windows 10 I think. And even then it's only the truly esoteric and unknown to Microsoft.

this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
1570 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

58311 readers
5983 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS