Epic Games Suing Google and Samsung Over App Store Monopolies, What It Means for Developers and Consumers

In a dramatic legal turn, Epic Games is once again in the ring, squaring off against Google. However, this time, Samsung has entered the fray as well. After securing a victory in December 2023 against Google for its monopolistic app store practices, the Fortnite creator is suing again, now targeting both tech giants in a new antitrust lawsuit. Epic accuses the two companies of undermining third-party app stores, putting developers and consumers at a disadvantage.

This case centers around Samsung’s “Auto Blocker” feature—a seemingly innocuous tool designed to protect users from installing apps from unauthorized sources. But Epic claims it does far more than protect users; it effectively blocks competition. As it stands, the Auto Blocker prevents installations from any store other than Google Play or Samsung’s Galaxy Store. And the process to disable the feature, Epic alleges, is a cumbersome 21-step labyrinth that discourages users from pursuing alternatives to these default stores.

Let’s take a deeper dive into what this lawsuit means, how it impacts consumers, and the broader implications for the app development world.

Epic vs. Google and Samsung

In August 2020, Epic Games first filed lawsuits against both Google and Apple, accusing them of monopolizing the mobile app store market. At the time, Epic didn’t yet have its own mobile app store, but that has since changed. On August 16, 2023, Epic launched its Epic Games Store for Android devices globally and on iPhones in the European Union. This launch was a milestone, particularly in Europe, where Apple was forced by the EU Digital Markets Act to allow alternate app stores on its devices.

But in an alleged coincidence, just a month before this launch, Samsung made its Auto Blocker feature more restrictive by setting it to “on” by default. This development is at the heart of Epic’s new lawsuit, as it essentially bars consumers from easily installing third-party app stores like Epic’s.

Convenience or Control?

Samsung’s Auto Blocker presents itself as a safety measure, warning users that it protects against malware and suspicious apps. But Epic isn’t buying it. CEO Tim Sweeney argues that the feature was not designed with security in mind, but rather to stifle competition from rival app stores. According to Epic’s lawsuit, Auto Blocker doesn’t actually evaluate the safety of the apps or their sources—it simply blocks anything that’s not on Samsung or Google’s approved list.

Consumers, therefore, are left with a frustrating dilemma. If they want to install a third-party app store, they face a 21-step process (though some reports claim it’s only four steps). Even then, the process is far from straightforward, with Auto Blocker repeatedly warning users about potential threats and asking if they’re sure they want to proceed. The setup, as Sweeney claims, is designed to make consumers give up halfway through and stick with Samsung’s and Google’s app stores.

Epic’s Broader Fight for Developers

Epic’s lawsuit isn’t just about its own mobile app store—it’s about the entire app development community. Sweeney has made it clear that this fight is on behalf of all developers who want to compete on a level playing field. He claims that Google’s and Samsung’s tactics make it nearly impossible for third-party stores to gain traction, harming the overall innovation ecosystem.

If Epic were fighting for exclusive privileges for its store, it might be able to settle the case more easily. But as Sweeney explains, the goal is to create a fairer system for all developers. That’s why Epic isn’t backing down, despite the immense resources and legal prowess of Google and Samsung.

What’s at Stake for Consumers?

At the heart of this legal battle is consumer choice. If Samsung’s Auto Blocker feature continues to discourage users from installing apps from third-party stores, it limits options and reduces competition. With fewer choices, users may end up paying more for apps and in-app purchases, while missing out on innovative new apps that struggle to break into the market.

Epic’s legal challenge is aimed at breaking down these barriers, potentially opening the floodgates for more app stores to thrive. If successful, this case could set a precedent that forces other phone manufacturers to rethink their app store policies as well.

What’s Next in the Legal Showdown?

While Epic has filed its lawsuit, the outcome is far from certain. In Epic’s earlier case against Google, the court sided with Epic, recognizing that Google’s actions harmed the company. However, this new case also involves Samsung, a key player in the Android ecosystem. Epic hopes the discovery process will reveal more evidence of collusion between Google and Samsung, much like how previous court battles exposed damaging internal communications from Google.

Interestingly, Samsung may argue that Auto Blocker is a user-friendly feature, allowing individuals to opt out during the initial setup of their phones. This could complicate Epic’s claim that Samsung is covertly blocking competition. Plus, with only two new Samsung phone models shipped since Auto Blocker became the default, Epic may find it challenging to prove substantial harm just yet. However, Sweeney remains optimistic, pointing to the fact that the Epic Games Store has already hit 10 million mobile installs.

The Future of App Stores and Competition

Epic Games’ battle against Google and Samsung could have far-reaching implications for the future of mobile app stores. At its core, this case is about fairness—both for developers who want to create new app experiences and for consumers who deserve a greater range of choices. As we wait for this legal saga to unfold, one thing is clear: this isn’t just about Fortnite. It’s a fight for the future of competition in the app ecosystem.

As Epic presses on, consumers and developers alike will be watching closely. For now, the question remains: will this lawsuit level the playing field, or will big tech’s gatekeepers maintain their control over the app store marketplace?