In response to a US antitrust lawsuit victory against Google, Epic Games has proposed significant changes to Google’s Android app distribution and in-app payment solutions. These proposals aim to enhance consumer choice, promote competition, and ensure fairness in accessing Android and Google products. Here are FAQs detailing Epic’s proposed reforms.
Table of Contents
Epic Games’ Proposed Changes to Google’s Android App Distribution Market
Broad Demands for Increased Consumer Choice and Competition
Epic Games, following its triumph in a US antitrust lawsuit against Google in 2023, has outlined a set of demands aimed at reshaping the Android app distribution landscape. In their submission on April 12, Epic emphasized the need for Google to enable consumers to download apps from any source without hindrance. They advocate for granting users and developers the freedom to decide on in-app purchase methods, free from anticompetitive practices and fees.
The gaming giant is determined to prevent Google from retaliating against them for challenging its app store policies. To foster competition, Epic has proposed several changes, including simplifying app sideloading, granting third-party apps access to all apps on Google Play, and integrating alternative billing systems within the US market.
Join Our Whatsapp Group
Join Telegram group
Proposed Changes to Android App Distribution Market
Agreements Prohibited to Increase Competition
Epic Games has highlighted a series of agreements that they believe Google should avoid to prevent stifling competition. These agreements include:
- Introducing additional steps for users to access preinstalled Third-Party App Stores.
- Incentivizing competing distributors to refrain from investing in alternative Android App Distribution Channels.
- Offering exclusive contracts to app developers, restricting app distribution solely to the Google Play Store.
- Setting release timing or app pricing to favor Google Play over third-party stores.
- Restricting apps from withdrawing from Google Play Store without Google’s approval.
Allow Downloading Apps from Third-Party Stores
Epic Games insists that Google should refrain from imposing unnecessary “friction steps” when downloading apps from Third-Party App Stores. They propose exceptions, allowing minimal friction such as a single one-tap screen for user confirmation. Additionally, Epic suggests Google may display warnings for non-notarized apps or known malware, maintaining user security standards.
Access to Android and Google Products: Ensuring Equality and Fair Competition
Parity of Access to Android Functionality
Epic Games insists on equal access to Android’s services for all apps, regardless of the chosen distribution channel. They advocate for the elimination of discrimination based on developers’ distribution choices. Google must ensure “parity of access to Android functionality,” granting app developers equal access to operating system features and APIs. Epic emphasizes that features inherent to an operating system should not be claimed as exclusive to the Google Play Store.
User Access to Google Services
According to Epic, Google should not restrict user access to its services, such as Google Search and Google Ads, based on the app’s distribution source. Users should have uninterrupted access to apps, regardless of whether they are obtained from a third-party app store.
Recommendations for Promoting Competition in Android App Distribution
Epic Games has provided recommendations aimed at promoting competition in app distribution markets, to be implemented over a six-year period to counteract the ongoing effects of unlawful conduct.
1. Third-Party App Stores Access to Google Play Store Catalog
Google is urged to grant third-party app stores access to the Google Play Store app catalog. Users should have the option to designate a third-party store as the update owner for apps installed via the Google Play Store, ensuring seamless management across platforms.
2. Distribution of Competing Third-Party App Stores on Google Play Store
Epic proposes that competing third-party app stores be allowed on the Google Play Store. The process for downloading these stores should mirror that of any other app, without imposing additional fees.
3. Non-Mandated Placement of Google Play Store
Google should refrain from mandating the placement of the Google Play Store on Android devices, including default home screen placement. This ensures fair competition among app distribution channels without undue influence from Google.
These recommendations aim to foster a more competitive landscape in app distribution, benefiting both developers and users alike.
Join Our Whatsapp Group
Join Telegram group
Proposed Changes to the Android In-App Payment Solutions Market
Facilitating Transparency and Integration of Payment Options
Epic Games has put forth a series of proposals aimed at promoting transparency and flexibility in the Android in-app payment solutions market.
1. Free Flow of Information Regarding Out-Of-App Purchasing Options
Epic urges Google to allow clear dissemination of information regarding out-of-app purchasing options. Specifically, they recommend:
- Displaying price differences between in-app purchases using Google Pay Billing (GPB) System and out-of-app payment options.
- Eliminating the requirement for App Developers to use Google APIs to enable out-of-app purchasing options.
- Avoiding imposition of coercive fees, higher than those charged by GBP, on transactions made through out-of-payment options.
2. Alternative In-App Payment Systems Integration
Epic suggests measures to seamlessly integrate alternative in-app payment systems:
- Allowing integration of any alternative in-app payment solution alongside or instead of GPB.
- Making price differences visible to users when using alternative in-app payment solutions.
- Removing the obligation for Developers to use Google APIs to invoke alternative in-app payment solutions.
- Avoiding imposition of coercive fees on transactions made through alternative in-app payment solutions.
3. Non-Discrimination Based on Payment Solution
Epic insists that Google should not discriminate against apps using alternative in-app payment solutions. Google must refrain from:
- Retaliating or threatening retaliation against any Developer.
- Impeding access to the Android platform, its functionality, features, or APIs for any app.
- Restricting access to Google’s products based on the chosen payment solution.
Establishment of Compliance Mechanisms
Epic proposes the establishment of a compliance committee and the appointment of a compliance officer to ensure adherence to the proposed changes. The committee will disclose calculations of average per-transaction total costs for handling in-app transactions to prevent the imposition of coercive fees.
Join Our Whatsapp Group
Join Telegram group
Protection Against Retaliation
Epic Games underscores the need for provisions to protect against potential retaliation from Google. They emphasize the importance of preventing Google from employing past tactics to maintain anti-competitive control over Android devices, thereby advocating for increased competition and choice for all developers and consumers.
Google is required to respond by May 2nd, with a hearing scheduled for May 23rd.
Frequently Asked Questions about Epic Games’ Proposed Changes to Google’s Android App Distribution Market
What are the main demands made by Epic Games in their proposed changes to Google’s Android app distribution market?
Epic Games advocates for increased consumer choice and competition by urging Google to enable unrestricted downloading of apps from any source and granting users and developers freedom in choosing in-app purchase methods. They also propose changes to prevent Google from engaging in agreements that stifle competition and to facilitate access to third-party app stores.
How does Epic Games propose to promote competition in the Android app distribution market?
Epic Games recommends granting third-party app stores access to the Google Play Store app catalog, allowing the distribution of competing third-party app stores on Google Play without imposing additional fees, and refraining from mandating the placement of the Google Play Store on Android devices.
How does Epic Games propose to ensure equality and fair competition in accessing Android and Google products?
Epic Games emphasizes equal access to Android’s services for all apps, regardless of the distribution channel chosen by developers. They advocate for transparency in pricing and integration of alternative in-app payment systems, as well as the establishment of compliance mechanisms and protection against retaliation from Google.
Frequently Asked Questions about Epic Games’ Proposed Changes to the Android In-App Payment Solutions Market
What proposals does Epic Games suggest to facilitate transparency and integration of payment options?
Epic Games recommends clear dissemination of information regarding out-of-app purchasing options, including displaying price differences between in-app purchases using Google Pay Billing (GPB) System and out-of-app payment options. They also propose integrating alternative in-app payment systems alongside or instead of GPB, without imposing coercive fees.
How does Epic Games propose to prevent discrimination based on payment solutions?
Epic Games insists that Google should not discriminate against apps using alternative in-app payment solutions, including refraining from retaliating against developers or impeding access to the Android platform based on the chosen payment solution.
What compliance mechanisms does Epic Games suggest to ensure adherence to the proposed changes?
Epic Games proposes the establishment of a compliance committee and the appointment of a compliance officer to disclose calculations of average per-transaction total costs for handling in-app transactions and prevent the imposition of coercive fees.
How does Epic Games seek protection against potential retaliation from Google?
Epic Games emphasizes the need for provisions to protect against potential retaliation from Google, aiming to prevent past tactics aimed at maintaining anti-competitive control over Android devices. They advocate for increased competition and choice for all developers and consumers.