Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google The Courts

Epic Games Sues Google and Samsung Over App Store Restrictions 45

Epic Games filed a new antitrust lawsuit against Google and Samsung, alleging they conspired to undermine third-party app stores. The suit focuses on Samsung's "Auto Blocker" feature, now enabled by default on new phones, which restricts app installations to "authorized sources" - primarily Google and Samsung's stores.

Epic claims Auto Blocker creates significant barriers for rival stores, requiring users to navigate a complex process to install third-party apps. The company argues this feature does not actually assess app safety, but is designed to stifle competition. Epic CEO Tim Sweeney stated the lawsuit aims to benefit all developers, not secure special privileges for Epic. The company seeks either default deactivation of Auto Blocker or creation of a fair whitelisting process for legitimate apps. This legal action follows Epic's December victory against Google in a separate antitrust case. Epic recently launched its own mobile app store, which it claims faces unfair obstacles due to Auto Blocker.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Epic Games Sues Google and Samsung Over App Store Restrictions

Comments Filter:
  • by rlwinm ( 6158720 ) on Monday September 30, 2024 @09:05AM (#64828237)
    The whole concept of app stores shouldn't even be a thing. There is a portable, universal app delivery platform these days: The web. Modern browsers can do almost everything an app can do (and just as secure). Concepts like service workers and IndexedDB have solved the background issue. Modern JITs and WASM mean performance really isn't the same argument it used to be.

    Other than people have "gotten used to it" - I can't think of a single reason for an app store to exist. In fact I use the browser for almost everything on my phone (I almost never download an "app" or even think about apps).
    • apple forcing webkit makes web apps suck and no app store can lead to browsers with no ad block.

    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by 2TecTom ( 311314 )

      Cheating shouldn't either yet Fortnite is overrun by cheaters and Epic does nothing. Funny that they should complain when they can't even manage their own. Hey Epic, your game is abusive and unfair and bullies are using it to abuse honest players while you get rich.

      Another example of corruption and classism in our corporatocracy..

    • by unrtst ( 777550 ) on Monday September 30, 2024 @10:34AM (#64828481)

      You seem to be arguing that both app stores and apps are unnecessary. What world do you live in?

      There are loads of apps that should remain as apps, from messaging apps to simple flashlight apps. Maybe you're fine with the apps that have shipped with your phone, and/or with what you have installed since getting it, and everything else you can just use the browser for. Even if we reduce your argument to ONLY the browser, I'd still want the option of installing other browsers. So where do we get those other apps?

      Yes, we could download apps from random websites and install .apk's directly, like it was 1998. The ease of delivering malware that way is far too great to normalize that approach, IMO. Heck, I can remember using rpmfind.net to find rpm's for RedHat 5 - it sucked. Distribution servers are the way to go (ex. apt repositories, app stores, etc..).

      It's probably going to get messier before the app store situation settles down. For instance, I can't imagine Apple maintaining 3rd party app store support in the EU but nowhere else for very long (5 years from now, if the EU situation hasn't changed, does anyone think they won't bring some of those "features" over to the rest of their ecosystem, or be forced to do so?). I'm thankful Epic is plowing ahead with this - they could have just taken the hit (the fees Google takes) and been fine (certainly better than they are on iOS). I'm kinda shocked there haven't been others joining them on any of these cases yet.

      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        For instance, I can't imagine Apple maintaining 3rd party app store support in the EU but nowhere else for very long (5 years from now, if the EU situation hasn't changed, does anyone think they won't bring some of those "features" over to the rest of their ecosystem, or be forced to do so?).

        Only going to happen if what we see going on in the EU explodes.

        As in a million different app stores, each having one big major app people want. Once that happens, Apple will probably open it up to worldwide distributio

      • by rlwinm ( 6158720 )

        There are loads of apps that should remain as apps, from messaging apps to simple flashlight apps.

        A "flashlight" app makes no sense - that should be part of the phone itself (or the chrome around the browser if we were talking web based phones). As for messaging, with async notifications, SSE, and websockets why do I need apps for that? It turns out chat apps run just fine in my phone's browser.

        I'd still want the option of installing other browsers.

        That's really the only component you need, and it sh

      • by mjwx ( 966435 )

        You seem to be arguing that both app stores and apps are unnecessary. What world do you live in?

        Most apps are just single use web browsers, 90% of them could easily be replaced by web pages because they already are just web pages.

        That being said, I've nothing against "app" stores, rather companies that try to foist you into using a useless app that is nothing more than an unreliable way to access a web page. Just give me a link to your web portal and let me choose my own damned browser.

        I avoid having too many apps on my phone and even a 3 year old mid-range phone still runs like butter. I know

        • by unrtst ( 777550 )

          Like your Krav classes, certainly, not everything needs an app. However, there are plenty of things I'd rather have implemented as a local app. Schedule and check-in for a workout class makes more sense as just a webpage, since it needs a central authority that's online. Notes, photo editors, home automation, barcode scanner/creator, printer utils, insta360 app, offline maps, books (kindle, BN, etc..), etc.. anything that works on my local data via local processes, I'd rather have an app for it than send th

    • by flink ( 18449 )

      Other than people have "gotten used to it" - I can't think of a single reason for an app store to exist. In fact I use the browser for almost everything on my phone (I almost never download an "app" or even think about apps).

      There is value to have a curator that ensures a minimum quality bar. There might be 1000 picture editing apps, but I appreciate having someone narrow my choice down to the 10 that don't crash every 5 minutes, won't harvest my credit card credentials and social security number, and won't drain my battery in 5 minutes while sending my location and browsing history to 5 different ad networks.

    • Other than people have "gotten used to it" - I can't think of a single reason for an app store to exist. In fact I use the browser for almost everything on my phone (I almost never download an "app" or even think about apps).

      How about the fact that websites are primarily designed for large monitors and interaction with mouse and keyboard. Apps are designed for smaller screens and touch interfaces. While users on smartphones can interact with websites, it is often less than ideal.

    • > I can't think of a single reason for an app store to exist.

      IF you were required to submit ALL your sources when submitting your app for release then the app stores could vet and curate "trusted" apps.

      Right now there is pseudo-trust of walled gardens. Customers don't have to worry about suspicious downloads from an "unseedy" site.

      • by rlwinm ( 6158720 )
        I certainly don't trust Apple or Google. I would prefer the seedy sites to those two companies.
    • I see no reason to prevent either app stores or apps from existing. There are some things the web isn't great at delivering, such as things that work in airplane mode, or out of range of a good connection, or uses that need access to the device's sensors.

      • by rlwinm ( 6158720 )

        There are some things the web isn't great at delivering, such as things that work in airplane mode, or out of range of a good connection, or uses that need access to the device's sensors.

        For offline mode, check out something called service workers. I've made websites that work completely offline quite well. In the end it seemed to be about the same amount of effort as native development once I got the service worker framework right.

        As for the phone's sensors. I think the popularity of "apps" has hurt

        • Note that I didn't say it was impossible to use web for offline use, it's just not ideal or easy to get right.

          As for permissions, many hardware sensors do *not* require permission, when using an app. For example, accelerometers and compass do not require special permissions when writing an app. Just the sensitive areas require permissions, like contacts, camera, and GPS location.

          I don't support Apple's and Google's monopolies. And that's what this story is about: alternative app stores, that might have diff

    • Do you also say Linux distributions should use "the web" and stop providing packages trough their repositories?

  • google stopped one plus from pre loading the epic store on there phones.

  • by mindwhip ( 894744 ) on Monday September 30, 2024 @09:15AM (#64828269)

    People are forced to install the Epic store to install and play Epic games even if they actually purchased those games elsewhere. This is more of an issue than the store phone manufacturers to have on their devices by default.

    Personally I choose to just not play any games from Epic.

    Maybe Epic should just sell their games on the widely used stores instead of trying to maintain their self delusion that given a choice people would use their store.

    • This is not about which store is used. It is about giving Google/Samsung/Apple 30 percent of the revenues of purchases made in the games. Epic wouldn't care where you downloaded the game if it didn't cost 30 percent of the sales.

      • This is not about which store is used. It is about giving Google/Samsung/Apple 30 percent of the revenues of purchases made in the games. Epic wouldn't care where you downloaded the game if it didn't cost 30 percent of the sales.

        That might be true if the games cost 30 per cent less on the Epic store. I don't have their store, and don't play their games, so I can't say for sure. But something tells me buying on the Epic store does NOT give you a 30% discount. Instead Epic likely takes that 30% themselves.

        • by pahles ( 701275 )
          Indeed, this is just one rich guy shouting to another rich guy 'I want to be richer than you'.
          • In the case more like one rich guy cannot stand he does not control another rich guy. For example, Tim Sweeney is still pissed that Valve (Gabe Newsome) charges 30% for most games but as the game makes more money, Valve charges less. Basically how dare Newsome give their better customers a better deal, how dare they! Don't ask me to explain Sweeney either other than the wish that Sweeney cannot control what Newsome does.
        • Epic doesn't care about the customer. This is about the profits at Epic games. Nowhere did I suggest that the savings go to the consumer.

          • So, if they want to be everything they accuse Google/Samsung/Apple of, don't count on any sympathy. Not even from a judge.
            • by unrtst ( 777550 )

              So, if they want to be everything they accuse Google/Samsung/Apple of, don't count on any sympathy. Not even from a judge.

              AFAICT, they're not rent seeking; They're providing their own services. They plan to eventually offer their services to others. What they're not planning is to restrict all users to using ONLY their app store, or making it difficult for others to do the same, which is what they're accusing Google/Samsung of. More competition in the market is something a judge is likely to side with.

        • by unrtst ( 777550 )

          That might be true if the games cost 30 per cent less on the Epic store. I don't have their store, and don't play their games, so I can't say for sure.

          The games are free to play.

          The purchases are in game purchases for cosmetic items (character skins and such).

          Why should Google or Samsung profit off of those in game purchases? And at 30%!
          Why shouldn't Epic get the full purchase amount?

          • by Anonymous Coward

            Bilbo, staring at the ring.

  • One setting that can be easily turned off is creating significant barriers? No. No one wants your shitty store. Barely anyone wants Epic's shitty games to begin with.

    Tim Sweeney is just a whiney little bitch who hasn't done anything useful or interesting in over a decade.

    • by unrtst ( 777550 )

      What's with all the Epic games hate? I've got my own reasons to not support them (no Linux client, not even via steam), but saying, "Barely anyone wants Epic's shitty games to begin with," is a bit much (1.1 million active players; 650m registered users).

      Where's the slashdot that bemoans Google's monopolistic practices and pushes for end user freedom and choice? How is what Epic doing in the wrong?

      • I still don't get what epic is complaining about with Google. They allow third party app stores, which can do everything that the play store can do since Android 12.

        Apple, on the other hand, allows neither other app stores nor sideloading, so they are clearly anticompetitive.

        • by unrtst ( 777550 )

          RE: Apple compared to Google here, I think they're just fighting this on all fronts and some are moving faster than others. There was a clear in on Android since it did already have some means of getting other apps on there, so then it's whether or not the implementation is anti-competitive (ex. they argue that Samsung's "Auto Blocker", which is in addition to allowing 3rd party sources, does not do any any assessment on the safety nor security of apps, but only serves to deter competition). Anyway... I tot

      • by Bahbus ( 1180627 )

        It's not what Epic is doing, it's how they've been doing it. There is nothing wrong with creating a competing store. There is everything wrong with it when the competing store legitimately sucks to use and is missing features. There is nothing wrong with games being exclusive to Epic's store. There is plenty wrong when the only reason they're exclusive is because Epic is paying them extra to compensate for their loss of sales.

        Epic only has one legitimately good product: the Unreal Engine. That's it. They ha

  • They won't achieve anything. Games will now be only official. I'm reading about kasyna online uk at https://pl.bestcasinos-pl.com/kasyna-online-uk/ [bestcasinos-pl.com] where I learned that they have it legally. But the main thing is to trust only white niches. The same thing in games, it's high time to remove piracy.

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes. -- Henry David Thoreau

Working...