Skip to main content
I don’t think there’s any question that Google Play and Google Play Billing are tied.

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.