Epic Victory Jury Rules Google Has an Illegal Monopoly in

Epic Victory: Jury Rules Google Has an Illegal Monopoly in the App Store Battle

After just a few hours of deliberation, the jury unanimously answered yes to all the questions put to them – that Google has monopoly power in the markets for Android app distribution and in-app billing services, that Google has anti-competitive measures in these markets took action and so on Epic was violated by this behavior. They concluded that Google also had an illegal connection between its Google Play app store and its Google Play Billing payment services, and that its distribution agreement, Project Hug contracts with game developers, and contracts with OEMs were all anticompetitive.

Wilson White, vice president of Google affairs and public policy, said the company plans to appeal the ruling and that “the trial has made clear that we are in strong competition with Apple and its App Store, as well as the app stores on Android devices and gaming consoles.” You can read the full statement below.

In a post on its company blog, Epic Games said: “Today's ruling is a win for all app developers and consumers around the world.” It proves that Google's app store practices are illegal and that Google is abusing its monopoly , to extort exorbitant fees, stifle competition and stifle innovation.”

However, we don't yet know what Epic actually won – that's up to Judge James Donato, who will decide what remedies might be appropriate. Epic never sued for damages; It wants the court to tell Google that every app developer has complete freedom to launch their own app stores and billing systems on Android, and we don't yet know how or if the judge might comply with those wishes. Both parties will meet with Judge Donato in the second week of January to discuss possible remedies.

Judge Donato has already stated that he will not grant Epic's additional request for an anti-circumvention clause “just to ensure that Google cannot reintroduce the same problems through an alternative creative solution,” as Epic's lead attorney Gary Bornstein did on November 28th.

“We don't do restraining orders that don't violate the law…if you have a problem, you can come back,” Donato said. He also said he had no intention of deciding what percentage of the fee Google should charge for its products.

Although Epic didn't sue for damages, Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney suggested that Epic could make hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars if it didn't have to pay Google's fee.

Here is the full verdict form the jury had to fill out in Epic v. Google:

Wilson White, Google vice president, government affairs and public policy:

We plan to appeal the verdict. Android and Google Play offer more choice and openness than any other major mobile platform. The test made it clear that we are in strong competition with Apple and its App Store, as well as the app stores on Android devices and gaming consoles. We will continue to defend the Android business model and remain deeply committed to our users, partners and the broader Android ecosystem.”

Update December 11, 8:45 p.m. ET: Added statements from Google and Epic Games and the jury's final verdict.