The judge just read page 45 out loud:
You may find that a tying arrangement exists between the Google Play Store and Google Play Billing if Google refuses to distribute Android apps through the Google Play Store unless Android app developers agree to use Google Play Billing to facilitate the sale of digital goods or services in those apps.
I think it’s pretty clear from Epic’s case that it foreclosed competition, too. But was it justified? If so, Google’s in the clear on this particular claim. Pages 48–49:
If you find that the tying arrangement serves a legitimate business purpose of Google, and that there are not substantially less restrictive means reasonably available to achieve that purpose, then you must find for Google and against Epic on the tying claim.
Eufy’s new 360-degree 4K camera doesn’t need Wi-Fi or power outlets
El Niño expected to smash heat records in 2024
What a bunch of A-list celebs taught me about how to use my phone
Now it’s the Galaxy Z Flip 6’s turn to leak in unofficial renders
Flop rock: inside the underground floppy disk music scene