What the Order Actually Requires

In December 2023, a San Francisco jury found that Google had illegally maintained a monopoly over Android app distribution and in-app billing, ruling unanimously in Epic Games' favour after a three-week trial in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. Judge James Donato issued the remedies order in October 2024, and it went well beyond what Google had hoped to contain.

The order requires Google to allow third-party app stores to operate within the Play Store itself — giving rival distributors like Epic's own store access to Google's existing install infrastructure — for a period of three years. Google must also permit developers to use alternative in-app payment systems without penalty, ending the tying arrangement that the jury found unlawful. A technical committee, with representation from Epic and an independent expert, was appointed to oversee compliance and resolve disputes. Google was prohibited from entering into revenue-sharing agreements with device manufacturers that had the effect of foreclosing rival stores — the kind of deals the jury heard extensive evidence about at trial.

The exterior of the Robert F. Peckham Federal Building and United States Courthouse in Oakland, California, photographed on a clear day from the plaza
The federal courthouse in Oakland. The United States never legislated on this; it litigated, twice.Photo: Robert So / Pexels

The Procedural Fight

Google has pursued every available mechanism to blunt or delay the injunction. The company filed for a stay pending appeal with Judge Donato, who denied it. Google then sought a stay from the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the order was an unprecedented restructuring of a private platform and that it would cause irreparable harm by forcing Google to distribute potentially unsafe apps it had not reviewed. The Ninth Circuit granted a partial administrative stay ↗ while it considered the fuller motion, meaning the most expansive provisions of the order were not immediately enforced.

The substantive appeal centres on whether the district court's remedy was proportionate to the liability finding and whether Donato exceeded his equitable authority. Google contends that the interoperability requirement — letting competing stores ride on Play Store infrastructure — goes beyond restoring competitive conditions and amounts to compelled dealing with rivals, a remedy antitrust courts have historically been reluctant to impose.

Chronology

  1. December 2023jury verdict for Epic in San Francisco
  2. October 2024Judge Donato issues remedies order
  3. Late 2024Google's stay motions denied by Donato; Ninth Circuit grants partial administrative stay
  4. Ongoingmerits appeal pending before the Ninth Circuit

Epic, for its part, has argued that any further delay simply extends the period of harm the jury already found proven. The case now sits with the Ninth Circuit, where the timeline for a merits ruling on the injunction remains open. Whatever the appellate court decides will land in a regulatory environment already shaped by the Digital Markets Act in the EU — a parallel pressure on app-store gatekeeping that Google is simultaneously navigating on a separate track.