Proposed Deal Between Google and Epic Games Harms Developers and Consumers
Washington, D.C. — On Monday, Demand Progress Education Fund, American Economic Liberties Project and the Open Markets Institute filed a brief asking a federal court to reject a proposal in Epic Games, Inc. v. Google LLC that risks entrenching barriers to competition in the Android app marketplace.
Epic Games previously sued Google over its monopolistic behavior running the Google Play Store. After a jury ruled against Google on all counts, on October 7, 2024, the court issued a permanent injunction to dismantle the structural barriers protecting Google’s monopoly. On March 4, 2026, both Google and Epic Games submitted proposed changes to the injunction, along with a private deal for themselves that leaves small and independent developers and consumers out in the cold. The groups’ brief warns that this proposal leaves key structural barriers to competition largely intact and leaves the market subject to a monopolistic status quo.
“This self-serving proposal between Epic Games and Google will come at the expense of small and independent app developers, gamers and competition in the marketplace itself,” said Demand Progress Education Fund Special Advisor Kate Oh. “The jury already found that Google illegally monopolized app distribution and in-app billing, hurting developers and consumers. We hope the court will see this sweetheart deal for what it is: a payoff to one party that leaves smaller app developers still at the mercy of Google’s monopoly.”
“Epic has pivoted from its earlier efforts to tackle Google’s stranglehold on the Android app ecosystem into a co-conspirator in the preservation of Google’s monopoly,” said Lee Hepner, Senior Legal Counsel at the American Economic Liberties Project. “Our intervention in this case is motivated by the need to preserve an adversarial response to this wholly inadequate settlement, and, in doing so, to protect the public’s interest in terminating Google’s anticompetitive conduct.”
“Epic deserves great credit for bringing and winning an important monopolization suit against Google over its illegal domination of the distribution of Android apps. This success, however, does not excuse the proposed settlement that would advance Epic and Google’s private interests at the expense of the public. The court should reject the parties’ proposal and ensure that the final order protects all participants in the Android app market,” said Sandeep Vaheesan, Legal Director at the Open Markets Institute.
“The parties’ proposed modifications and settlement terms reveal a bilateral deal that preserves and strengthens Google’s ability to make money by simply controlling access to the market while narrowing the competitive alternatives available to developers. The net effect is a marketplace in which Google retains its gatekeeper position while key checks on that power have been neutralized by private contract,” states the brief.