Google's latest antitrust trial to focus on Play Store app prices

Google is confronting thesecond major U.S. antitrust trial in two monthslooking to cast the internet powerhouse as a brazen bully that uses its immense wealth and people's dependence on one of its main products to stifle competition at consumers' expense.

The federal court trial that opened in San Francisco Mondaytargets the Google Play Store, whichdistributes apps for the company's Android software that powers virtually all of the world's smartphonesnot made by Apple.

The case, stemming from a lawsuit filed by video game maker Epic Games, alleges Google created an illegal monopoly on Android apps primarily so it can boost its profits through commissions ranging from 15 per centto 30 per centon purchases made within an app.

"The result of what Google is doing is higher prices, lower quality and less choice for everybody," Epic attorney Gary Bornstein said during a 45-minute opening statement before the 10-person jury that will decide the case.

Googlelawyer Glenn Pomerantz attempted to debunk the portrait of the company having a stranglehold on Android apps by outlining a wide gamut of competition from rival mobile and video game console stores, as well as Apple's store for apps that run on its iPhone software.

"Because Google faces strong competition from Apple and others, it cannot be and is not a monopolist," Pomerantz asserted in his opening statement.

Google's strategy to lean on Android's competition with Apple and the iPhone in its trial with Epic is tinged irony. That's because Google in September became immersed in the biggest U.S. antitrust trial in a quarter-century a case largely centred on payments that the company makes to Apple to ensure its dominant search engine automatically fields queries made on iPhones.

Epic's allegations against Google mirror those levelled against Apple in a case that went to trial in May 2021.

Commissions from app purchases in question

Although a federal judge sided with Apple on most fronts in that trial, the outcome opened one potential crack in the digital fortress that the company has built around the iPhone.

The judge and an appeals court both determined Apple should allow apps to provide links to other payment options, a change that could undermine the up to30 per centcommissionthat both Apple and Google collect on digital purchases made within a mobile app. Apple is appealing that part of the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Epic is also challenging most elements of the case that it lost.

Epic is now taking aim at Google's commission system, even though Android software is already set up to allow other stores, such as Samsung's, todistribute apps that work on the operating system.

Even so, Epic maintains that Google still has a stranglehold on the Android app ecosystem and the payment system attached to itand has paid hundreds of millions of dollars to stifle competition.

WATCH | Why the U.S. government is taking Google to court:

Why the U.S. government is suing Google

12 months ago

Duration 9:45

The biggest antitrust trial in 25 years is underway in the United States. Andrew Chang explains why the Department of Justice says Google broke the law to monopolize the internet.

In his opening statement, Bornstein accused Google of deploying a "bribe and block" strategy to discourage competition and then make it too cumbersome or worrisome for consumers to download Android apps from other distribution outlets than the Play Store.

That is why, Bornstein said, the Play Store handles more than 90 per cent of all Android download apps and resulted in the commission store generating more than $12 billion in revenue during 2021. That figure represented about five per centof the $237.5 billion in Google Services revenue most of which came from digital ads during 2021, according tofinancial statements of its corporate parent, Alphabet Inc.

"Google makes it a challenge to put a competitor on the phone (powered by Android)," Bornstein said. "If a competition were a race, it's like Google gets to run on a nice smooth track and everyone else has to run on quicksand."

Pomerantz depicted Google's tactics as way to make sure Android apps are safe to use and its commission system as a way to defray the costs for an operating system that powers billions of smartphones around the world. The arguments also echoed the defence that Apple successfully used in its 2021 trial with Epic.

As Apple's lawyers did, Pomerantz suggested Epic is primarily interested in finding a way to boost its own profit by evading a payment system that siphons revenue away from its popular Fortnite title and other video games.

"They want to take all the benefits of Android and all the benefits of the Play Store and not pay for them," Pomerantz said of Epic.

Settled case with Tinder parent company

The trial before U.S. District Judge James Donato is scheduled to last until just before Christmas and include testimony from longtime Google executive Sundar Pichai, who is now CEO of the company's parent, Alphabet Inc.

Pichai recently testified in Washington, D.C., during an antitrust trial that is expected to wrap up later this month, but the judge in that case isn't likely to rule until next year.

Google initially was going to have to defend itself against multiple foes in the trial, but in September it settled allegations that had been brought against the Play Store by state attorneys general and just last week resolved a case being pursued by Match Group, the owner of Tinder and other online dating services.

LISTEN | What the Google antitrust case means for the future of the internet:

Front Burner22:21Google on trial: U.S. takes on tech giant

On Tuesday, a judge in the U.S. will begin hearing arguments in whats been called the first monopoly trial of the modern Internet era. At the heart of the case is whether Google used its search engine dominance to illegally throttle competition an accusation Google denies, claiming competition is just one click away. Leah Nylen is an antitrust and investigations reporter with Bloomberg News, and today, she explains what the U.S. government is alleging, how Google is responding, and what this case could mean for the future of the Internet.Looking for a transcript of the show? Theyre available here daily: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcripts

The Match settlement prompted Google to switch from its original request for a jury trial to a proceeding to be decided by the judge, butDonato rebuffed the bid.

Match is receiving a $40-millionUS refundin fees that had been placed in an escrow account earlier this yearand adopting Google's "user choice billing" system in its settlement. The terms of the resolution with the state attorneys general is expected to be revealed during Google's trial with Epic.

Epic CEO Tim Sweeney skewered the "user choice billing" option as a sham in a social media post vowing to fight Google in court. Sweeney also is expected to take the witness stand during the trial.