It was stated that Android users are put in danger of experiencing security breaches if it is forced to open the Play Store to competition.
Updated at five o’clock Eastern Time on October 18: District Judge James Donato has decided to give a stay order for administrative purposes. The prior order issued by Donato, which was scheduled to go into force in the near future, is effectively placed on hold until the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decides whether or not to grant Google’s stay application. What follows is a statement that was provided to Newtechmania by a Google spokesperson:
We are happy with the decision made by the District Court to temporarily halt the implementation of potentially harmful remedies that Epic has requested. At the same time, the Court of Appeal is considering our request to further halt the execution of the remedies while we appeal. We look forward to continuing to make our case to defend the 100 million Android users in the United States, the over 500,000 developers in the United States, and the thousands of partners who have benefited from our platforms. These remedies pose a threat to Google Play’s ability to provide a safe and secure experience.
This is the first version of the narrative.
Google has formally submitted a move [PDF] to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, requesting that the order that requires the corporation to open the Play store to competitors be put on hold for a period of time. A federal jury determined that Google held an illegal monopoly on app distribution and in-app billing services for Android smartphones, which resulted in the company of Google losing an antitrust lawsuit that was launched by Epic Games. If you recall, the lawsuit was filed by Epic Games. At the beginning of this month, United States District Judge James Donato issued an order to Google, directing the company to grant access to the Google Play app catalog to third-party app shops and to make those stores available for download from its storefront. Now, Google is requesting that the court provide a stay on that order while it appeals the verdict in the Epic antitrust complaint. The company claims that the order will put 100 million Android users in the United States at risk of “substantial new security risks.”
The business referred to the decision as “harmful and unwarranted,” and it stated that if it is allowed to remain in effect, it will pose a threat to Google’s ability to “provide a safe and trusted used experience.” It was suggested that if it were to make third-party app shops available for download from Google Play, consumers might get the impression that the business is endorsing them, which would result in “real risks for [its]users.” It is possible that certain app marketplaces offer “less rigorous protections,” as Google said, which might put consumers at risk of being exposed to hazardous and malicious applications.
Furthermore, it was stated that granting access to the Play catalog to third-party retailers could be detrimental to businesses that do not like to have their items available alongside content that is deemed improper or dangerous. The provision of access to its full collection to third-party stores has the potential to provide “bad-intentioned” stores with a “veneer of legitimacy.” Furthermore, it was suggested that allowing developers to link out from their apps “creates significant risk of deceptive links,” because malicious actors might exploit the feature to carry out phishing attacks in order to hack the devices of users and steal their data.
One of the most important modifications that the court is proposing is to make it possible for developers to remove Google Play billing as an option. This would enable them to provide their applications to Android customers without having to pay a commission to the relevant firm. Google, on the other hand, stated that if it were to permit developers to remove its charging system, it would be able to “force an option that may not have the safeguards and features that users expect.”
Google underlined in its filing that the three weeks that the court allotted it to implement these significant adjustments is insufficient time for a “Herculean task.” According to the report, it poses a “unacceptable risk of safety” that has the potential to result in significant problems that could compromise the performance of Android devices owned by users. Another point that the firm raised was why the court decided to side with Epic in its antitrust complaint, when it had previously ruled in favor of Apple in a case that was very similar to the one that Epic had filed. “It is pause-inducing that Apple, which requires all apps go through its proprietary App Store, is not a monopolist, but Google — which built choice into the Android operating system so device makers can preinstall and users can download competing app stores — was condemned for monopolization.”
The following comment was released by Epic Games to Newtechmania: “The verdict of the jury and the injunction issued by the court were crystal clear: Google’s anticompetitive Play Store practices are illegal.” Fear mongering and the use of security as a false excuse to delay the adjustments that have been imposed by the court are the only things that Google is doing. In an effort to maintain their dominance over Android and continue to collect extortionate fees, Google is making this last-ditch effort. The injunction issued by the court needs to be put into effect as quickly as possible so that consumers and developers may reap the benefits of increased competition in the mobile ecosystem.