Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#351

Post by MBCook »

Racing0461 wrote: post #162
LordKeren wrote: post #2

It will be extremely interesting to see how this shapes android going forward. Google didn’t just lose some point— they lost every point > The jury unanimously answered yes to every question put before them — that Google has monopoly power in the Android app distribution markets and in-app billing services markets, that Google did anticompetitive things in those markets, and that Epic was injured by that behavior. Th…

> The jury These cases always goes like this. Jury awards 1 billion dollars etc. It always gets revised by the judge later on. Is this any different?

The jury was only finding guilt, penalty has not happened yet so we don’t know what kind of fines or whatever Google will have to deal with.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#352

Post by patmorgan23 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #202
Racing0461 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The jury These cases always goes like this. Jury awards 1 billion dollars etc. It always gets revised by the judge later on. Is this any different?

Yes, as your own comment points out. Juries determine questions of fact. That can't (for the most part, there are of course exceptions) be revised by a judge. The applied penalty is a very different thing, and can be and usually is revised by the judge.

Usually what happens is a point of law gets appealed and one of the chances of action gets thrown out and the penalty that was tied to it.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#353

Post by hatsix »

colechristensen wrote: post #297
rtpg wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple offers the same kinds of deals (see Netflix discussions) though there the rationales are different, which leads to sweatier "Apple has to offer deals because their value add is so bad, and having alternative app stores would help"-style arguments... I don't really know of a good legal argument there.

Is Apple's deal with Netflix anticompetitive though? Google is paying hardware manufacturers to use their search and for exclusivity with their store. Both of those are more or less explicitly to keep out competition. Apple cut a deal with Netflix but what competition does it squash? These are just different issues.

It squashes competition with Netflix

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#354

Post by deepsun »

MBCook wrote: post #340
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this not all true for Apple and its app store?

I think Madeofpalk’s comment explains the (possible) issue very well. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38608075 Apple has always been “here’s the rules, follow or go away”. Google was “we’re open!” except they kept undermining that.

It doesn't matter for US legal system how their marketing call that. It's either legal or not.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#356

Post by fnordpiglet »

hedora wrote: post #336
fnordpiglet wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% correct. I was involved in the Netscape Microsoft anti trust case and this is specifically the finding that led to their loss (way too late for us)

The jury found that Google has a monopoly on the Android platform. That would extend to Apple and iOS, but I’ll be shocked if that finding is turned into a legal precedent that is upheld on appeal. For one thing, the jury is probably more technically savvy than the judges that will ultimately decide this case.

Monopolies are not illegal. It’s leveraging the monopoly to exert force on adjacent markets that is. In the case here googles foul play is making side deals for preferential treatment against other app stores given their control over the handset operating system. Apple doesn’t offer an App Store market and never has nor ever represented otherwise, the app store is and always has been part of the operating system. This isn’t true for Google. Maybe for you and I this is splitting hairs, but splitting hairs is 99% of the law.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#357

Post by MBCook »

hedora wrote: post #336
fnordpiglet wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% correct. I was involved in the Netscape Microsoft anti trust case and this is specifically the finding that led to their loss (way too late for us)

The jury found that Google has a monopoly on the Android platform. That would extend to Apple and iOS, but I’ll be shocked if that finding is turned into a legal precedent that is upheld on appeal. For one thing, the jury is probably more technically savvy than the judges that will ultimately decide this case.

But it wouldn’t because I don’t think that’s what it means.

They appear to have ruled that Google has a monopoly because they’ve been squashing everyone else who should have been able to make an App Store by Google’s policies.

Apple isn’t squashing anyone, they just don’t allow it in the first place.

So I don’t think this would apply to Apple because of the line of reasoning. I know most people on hacker news think Apple should be forced to allow alternate app stores, but I don’t think this ruling can be used for that. It appears you would need something else.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#358

Post by MBCook »

lcw wrote: post #294
TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the result of this case is "you can have a monopoly as long as your device and ecosystem are 100% locked down", that's terrible! Monopolies aren’t illegal. Only the abuse of a monopoly position to advance your interest in other markets is illegal. E.g. It’s not illegal to be the only seller of gasoline in the country. It is illegal though to bundle laundry powder with gasoline sales to corner the laundry powder…

I mean sure, but in a practical sense the company becoming the only seller of gasoline happened through anti-competitive behavior and not just because they have a superior gasoline product. I think that two app stores controlling 100% of distribution and setting their rates similarly feels pretty anti-competitive.

If two companies end up in that situation without breaking the law, then there’s nothing wrong with it legally by definition.

It becomes an issue for the legislature to fix. Not the courts.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#359

Post by mvdtnz »

martimarkov wrote: post #169
e63f67dd-065b wrote: post #22

I wonder what the remedies will be -- sideloading is already allowed, so allowing third party in-app billing? That seems to be the actual thing the juries said -- that Google used their dominant position to do anticompetitive things, among which is taking their 30% cut on everything. Hope that this happens to Apple eventually too.

Hope it doesn't happen to Apple as I like and prefer that I can only buy stuff and most importantly have a single place to cancel all my subscriptions without dark patterns like having to talk to a person to cancel. I'll again make my argument that the developers should respect the choice of the users. If the user chose iOS maybe they chose it because they wanted the curated experience and the locked it product. I ce…

Apple forbids developers from even telling their customers that it's costing them 30% more.

Re: Epic vs. Google: Google Loses

#360

Post by deepsun »

madeofpalk wrote: post #139
Spivak wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the fact Epic lost so handily against Apple for the same thing is pretty chilling for the future of open devices. Lock down your platform tight as a drum and you may employ all manners of anticompetitive practices because you legally forbid the existence of competitors and you're "curating your experience" but open yourself up to any competition and your behavior becomes anticompetitive.

Problem is that Google tried to have it both ways. Android is technically much more open, but then they would make deals to squash any other competition. It’s exactly the un-openness that Google’s gotten in trouble for. This article lists a bunch of the special deals Google made with various companies in order to prevent competition https://www.theverge.com/23959932/epic-v-google-trial-antitr... > One Google Play exe…

> significantly less

But even one deal is enough.

Post reply on HN