Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Android

Google Ordered To Make Sweeping Changes, Open Android App Store To Rivals (theverge.com) 47

Posted by msmash from the breaking-news dept.
A U.S. federal judge has mandated significant changes to Google's Android app store operations. Judge James Donato's ruling in Epic v. Google requires Google to allow rival app stores within its Play Store and grant them access to its app catalog for three years, beginning November 2024.

The order prohibits Google from requiring its payment system for Play Store apps and permits developers to inform users about alternative payment methods. Google is also barred from offering incentives for app launch exclusivity or sharing app revenue with potential app store competitors. The ruling restricts Google from providing financial perks to device makers and carriers for Play Store exclusivity.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Ordered To Make Sweeping Changes, Open Android App Store To Rivals More

Google Ordered To Make Sweeping Changes, Open Android App Store To Rivals

Comments Filter:

  • up yours wapo (Score:2, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo ( 153816 )

    Story is paywalled and wapo stories aren't worth the effort of evading a paywall. Anyone have a link to a story that's worth reading on this subject? What does giving them access to their app catalog mean?

    • Story is paywalled and wapo stories aren't worth the effort of evading a paywall. Anyone have a link to a story that's worth reading on this subject?

      Try pasting the link to TFA into archive.is to search for an archived version.

    • Here you go:

      https://wapo.st/4eBcecn [wapo.st]

  • lol. not going to happen. (Score:5, Informative)

    by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @02:33PM (#64846363)

    First of all:

    ...ruling in Epic v. Google requires Google to allow rival app stores within its Play Store and grant them access to its app catalog...

    An app store within an app store? That won't confuse consumers at all! Especially when they will have the same apps in them.

    But really the main issue is the time table. Nov 2024? Nothing goes from courtroom to implemented in less than a month. There will be an emergency injunction and even if Google ultimately loses they will have a year or two to make the necessary changes.

    • lol. Going to happen. Google deserves to lose, and it's about time the law caught up to the tech companies who write their own rules to dominate markets.

      • As my post said, even if it does happen it won't be by November. The judge giving that time frame is laughable. That's simply too short a lead time for complying with a court order. Look at Epic vs. Apple, EU vs. Apple, etc. Compliance deadlines are always into future calendar years because of technical challenges and legal work needed to institute these plans.

    • I don't think people are confused by stores within stores at all. Brick-and-mortar stores have been doing it for generations. Walmart has other smaller stores inside its walls, as does every other big-box store. Shopping malls are exclusively devoted to this concept.

      On the digital ide, Amazon is full of third-party product stores. We all seem to manage the complexity.

    • I could download F-Droid from Google Play store, instead of sideloading it.

  • I thought only the great evil of the EU was doing this...Huh....

    • It still hasn't happened yet but it's inevitable in the US. Overall, as a society, we prefer to take more measured approaches when heavy handed intervention is necessary. Europe's inability to take measured approaches is why they can't compete in basically everything. Take for example, they decided to ban GMO before they even understood it. Yet the scientific consensus on it being safe is even stronger than that of climate change. Now they're way behind the rest of the world in agriscience, they have a popu

  • Reality (Score:5, Funny)

    by JBMcB ( 73720 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @02:39PM (#64846377)

    In the lawyers heads:
    "Now people can buy stuff from the Epic, Microsoft and Sony stores while still in the Android store, and use Visa or Mastercard directly"

    In reality:
    "I bought something from the Sorny Megagames Store and paid with Versa, and now my bank account is gone."

  • Just make it buyer beware... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by toddz ( 697874 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @03:13PM (#64846449)
    If I were Google (Apple), I'd just say fine do whatever the heck you want. Writeup a EULA that indemnifies Google (Apple) and voids the warranty if you do something that is outside of their control. That way when your identity and money go to some scammer Google (Apple) can just shrug their shoulders and say wasn't our app store, wasn't our approved app, we didn't approve that app, wasn't our payment processor, you go sort it out.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by iwrks ( 6306230 )
      I fully agree, but when I made that suggestion for the Apple App store - people hated the idea They want all the coverage they have now, but with side-loading What could go wrong...

    • What are you talking about! They already "shrug their shoulders" when it comes to apps in their own app store.

  • Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dmay34 ( 6770232 ) on Monday October 07, 2024 @03:46PM (#64846519)

    Look, I don't pretend to understand how it's possible that Google's Play store is a monopoly but Apple's App Store isn't, but whatever.

    This is good for Google and Google should embrace it. Google should start running ads bragging about opening up Android. This is Nashian Economics and will benefit everyone -including Google- if they play this right. But because everyone in Silicon Valley wants to have the next monopoly, you know they won't.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by allo ( 1728082 )

      The playstore ...
      - Can install apps without an additional prompt
      - Does not require a scary "Do you want to allow play to install ads? They can contain malware!" prompt before it is allowed to install ads
      - Can update many apps without showing many "Do you want to update app X" prompts
      - Can install updates in the background

      You may have seen other stores without these problems, but they are on their respective platforms. I think for example the Amazon Appmarket, which has these problems on most devices, is wel

  • Has any third-party app store ever made money? Epic even testified in court that, after five years, they lose money on their Steam competitor store. Be careful what you wish for. I can't imagine a circumstance that I would use an app store not provided by the device manufacturer.

  • A paywalled new organization reporting on google being told paywalls are anticompetitive.
    Should paywalled news sources be forced to allow other news organizations free access to paywalled content so their competitors can resell it?

  • then?

    Will this ruling shortly be affecting Apple too, making it "open season" on IOS?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Khyber ( 864651 )

      This is Epic's game - pick on google so they can go right after apple afterwards.

      Good.

      Then let all of them fall afterwards.

    • I think the rationale was that there has never been a third-party app store on Apple devices--the stack is integrated, which is allowed. They've never made any claim that someone could start a third-party store, so they're not *competing unfairly* in the App Store space. It's simply not a market at all.

      Google TECHNICALLY allows third-party app stores, but competes unfairly in the space, putting all sorts of restrictions on other stores.

      Apple can argue that the product that they release is a package that con

      • Google TECHNICALLY allows third-party app stores, but competes unfairly in the space, putting all sorts of restrictions on other stores.

        What kind of restrictions does Google put on other app stores?

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by mnemex ( 165180 )

          It won't host them on the Google App Store.

          Also, anything that is hosted on the Google App Store must only ever accept money through the app store, which rather prevents competing app stores on google from working even if they were allowed.

          If they're from the vendor that provides your device, or you sideload them they're presumably less restricted.

          • It won't host them on the Google App Store.

            So what? You can get them anywhere and enabling sideloading is just answering yes to a warning. Once installed they can do all the same stuff the Play Store does.

      • So not allowing any competing app store is somehow less monopolistic than allowing it but putting restrictions on it.

        That's some tortuously twisted legal logic there.

        Akin to "virtue is its own punishment".

        • It is and it isn't.

          Like, if you owned some sort of store and you also sold baskets that made the rest of the shopping experience better, I don't think it's necessarily the case that you're required to sell competitors' baskets. It's your store, you do what you like.

          But if you say, "hey, I'm gonna sell everyone's baskets here," but then you throw all of them in a cupboard and punch anyone that tries to get to them, that's a different kind of shady.

          And of course, this MAINLY matters only because Apple and Goo

          • I'll give you another analogy.

            Google owns the Android shopping mall, and Apple owns the iPhone shopping mall.

            Google has their big "Play Store" in there, but also allows other stores in its mall. The mall has rules and standards though, set by Google.

            whereas in the iPhone mall, there is only the one big "App Store" flagship store.

            Even though it is as big as the biggest mall, Apple convinces the legal system that it is not a mall after all, since it only has one big store in it.

  • Before Apple since they won't have to share profits with Google.

  • I don't understand: on Android I can already sideload any app store I want and also can already sideload any app I want, still they get a ruling forcing them to allow alternative app store in Play (I have nothing against that, easier for me to install F-Droid or ApkMirror). Still Apple get a free pass in the US and they aren't forced to do anything and continue their anti-competitive practices (forcing WebKit, forcing their payment system and such). Why Google and Apple are treated differently?

  • This is huge...if it survives appeal.

    Google's app store is a vertical monopoly and quite obviously anti-competitive. (Apple's is too and a ruling here will make it easier to get a ruling aganst Apple)

    The big winner hear is most likely to be Amazon -- which has had to remove purchase capabilities in Android in order to preserve their margin (and because negotiations on Google's "cut" failed, mostly because there was no fair cut). In general, the big winners will be, like Amazon, exisitng payment/financial

  • Google at least allows you to add other app stores to your Android device. Apple, big Foxtrot-Uniform.

    I think if they force Google to, then Google better be able to turn-a-round and have Apple forced to do the same.

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close