Epic judge orders Google to let rivals set up app stores A US court has ordered Google to refrain from a wide variety of business practices the web giant uses to bolster its Play Store, as a consequence of its December 2023 antitrust defeat against Epic Games. In that case, Epic argued that Google's Play Store rules and contractual agreements with developers and partners violated …
Why do you say dodgy ? That seems to me to be a gratuitious ad-hominem attack. Other app stores can very well be just as reliable, or better, than Google's (or Apple's).
And what makes you think that any other app store is going to list an app if its owner doesn't submit it for listing ?
I don't know that app stores scrape other stores like pseudo-AI companies scrape other sites. If you do, please tell us.
Why do you say dodgy?
If third party app stores are allowed to copy apps off Play Store and host themselves without the consent of the app owner, some of those app stores WILL be dodgy. Doesn't matter if some aren't - if they aren't they could ask the app owner for permission to host their app and the app owner may be OK with that for a non dodgy store.
But the way the judge's order reads (at least from the article, not sure if that's a direct quote) it sure sounds like the judge wants third party app stores to be able to copy apps en masse from the Play Store so Google doesn't have an inbuilt advantage based on having so many more apps. Leaving the app owner with no choice, other than perhaps "after the fact" finding all the third party app stores that host his app and demanding they take them down if he doesn't want them there.
This
-- Google will permit third-party Android app stores to access the Google Play Store's catalog of apps so that they may offer the Play Store apps to users. --
seems to say that app developers/owners don't get a say
Issue of paid apps aside, did Apple get such a requirement?
Seems weird since even hosting the apks is definitely not free. Do they need to provide an API? How about updates? I'd rather be able to have a say where my app ends up given unhappy users will blame devs and not the store (as they already do with the mess that is Play Store sometimes).
As an Android app developer I publish my apps on Play. I do not publish them on Amazon, Huawei or Galaxy stores for various reasons and don't want to.
Most apps on Play can't be published on other stores without extensive rewrites that will make no money. Is Mr Justice Dumbass going to pay for that?
This dumb judge has no idea what he's talking about and can eff off telling me how to do MY job.
How totally unsurprising.
And, of course, it is asking for a stay of execution while it spends the next ten years fighting this decision.
Because that's what it's going to do. Google will fight this tooth and nail, because it hits its bottom line and we can't have that, now can we ?
Just today, Podcast Addict has been banned (sorry for the xitter link, but it's where they announced it), once again for the contents of some podcast...
It is tiresome in the extreme that whenever somebody/something wealthy has a ruling against it, an appeal seems almost immediate.
Doesn't there have to be formal ground to appeal? And some likeliness of success established?
I assume its always been the way to protect the rich, and pay more laywers...
They are not exclusive - plenty of big companies operate app stores.
..ask any Samsung galaxy owner where they get the Galaxy Store (a Samsung store) & standard Google play store.
A big beast online, Amazon do their own app store for android
Neither of those (when I last checked) have everything that is on the Play Store - the whole point of them is limited number of "curated" apps.
As I have said many times, confused why ruling went against Google as, compared to an iPhone, it is trivially easy to install apps from unofficial sources on an android.
Google may not share revenue generated by the Google Play Store with any person or entity that distributes Android apps, or has stated that it will launch or is considering launching an Android app distribution platform or store
So if I read that correctly if someone was to have a paid for app in the google play store and then say they might consider opening their own store then they won’t get any income from that point forward….
I could be reading it wrong but it sounds like nobody would consider dining that unless they have a large reserve of cash?
That is what is seems to say to me too. So because I have apps in Play I'm not allowed to open my own app store or if I do Google can stop paying me what I'm owed by Play?
That is the opposite of what this stupid judge claims to be doing. Or is he an Apple Fanboi who knows exactly what he's doing?
Google may not …require the use of Google Play Billing in apps distributed on the Google Play Store, or prohibit the use of in-app payment methods other than Google Play Billing;
this is why kindle on android cannot purchase a book directly from the app anymore. wonder if this decision os going to drive a reversal on this policy allowing amazon kindle app for android to regain ability to do so.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
