In a bid to expedite the resolution of its antitrust legal battle with Fortnite maker Epic Games, Match Group, and state attorneys general, Google has filed a new motion for summary judgment. The tech giant is seeking to have several key claims dismissed by the court, arguing that they are not in violation of antitrust law.
The Motion for Summary Judgment
In its filing, Google’s legal team is asking the court to dismiss several arguments made by the plaintiffs regarding the nature of Google’s app store business, revenue-sharing agreements, and other app store-related projects. The company believes that the court has enough information on hand to make determinations on these claims before the case goes to trial.
Key Claims at Stake
Google is specifically seeking the court’s judgment on five key claims that are central to the plaintiffs’ ability to prove anticompetitive behavior. These include:
- Developer Distribution Agreement: The company wants the court to dismiss the argument that its Developer Distribution Agreement is illegal because it prohibits the distribution of other app stores.
- Project Hug: Google is pushing back against claims that Project Hug, a program designed to incentivize Android game developers to keep their games on the Google Play Store, was an anticompetitive move.
- Revenue-Sharing Agreements with Wireless Carriers: The company argues that these agreements are outside the statute of limitations and should be dismissed.
- App Subscriptions and In-App Purchases: Google claims that consumers cannot recover any alleged overcharges for app subscriptions and in-app purchases, as the plaintiffs were unable to show harm to competition.
- Tying: The company argues that Play’s billing services are not a separate product and that over 90% of apps on Google Play are free.
Background
The antitrust trial has been ongoing for several months, with the plaintiffs alleging that Google engaged in anticompetitive behavior by dominating the mobile app market. Google has denied these allegations, arguing that its actions were necessary to maintain a competitive market and protect consumers.
Recent Developments
In recent developments, the court ruled last month that Google’s failure to preserve some of its messages for discovery requires sanctions. The plaintiffs successfully demonstrated that Google employees tended to switch off chat history on internal discussions in an effort to destroy sensitive communications related to the case. The DoJ recently cited the same issue in its own antitrust investigation.
Conclusion
The motion for summary judgment is a significant development in the ongoing antitrust trial between Google and the plaintiffs. If successful, it could potentially expedite the resolution of the case and alleviate some of the pressure on Google to defend itself against these allegations.
Related Stories
- Duolingo sees 216% spike in US users learning Chinese amid TikTok ban and move to RedNote
- Tesla to split $100M award for electric truck charging corridor in Illinois
- Bluesky is getting its own photo-sharing app, Flashes
