Epic Games Sues Google, Samsung Over App Store Restrictions

Epic Games has taken legal action against Google and Samsung, filing a federal lawsuit accusing the two companies of colluding to stifle competition from third-party app stores on Android devices. The lawsuit, brought in the Northern District of California, focuses on Samsung’s Auto Blocker feature, which Epic claims restricts app installations from sources outside of Google’s Play Store and Samsung’s Galaxy Store. According to Epic, this feature, initially introduced as an optional security measure, is now being turned on by default, limiting the ability of users to install apps from third-party stores, including the Epic Games Store.

Epic argues that Samsung’s decision to enable Auto Blocker by default directly impacts its newly launched Epic Games Store for Android. The company alleges that users are now forced to navigate a “21-step process” to install apps from external sources, a barrier that discourages many potential customers from completing the process. Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, has claimed that around 50% of users attempting to download the Epic Games Store on Android give up due to the excessive hurdles created by Auto Blocker. This, Epic argues, is part of a coordinated effort by Google and Samsung to maintain control over the app ecosystem and prevent competition from emerging.

The lawsuit comes on the heels of Epic’s antitrust victory against Google last year, in which a jury found that Google had abused its dominant position in the Android app marketplace. Epic claims that the recent changes to Samsung’s Auto Blocker are designed to preemptively counter the remedies the court is expected to impose on Google as a result of the antitrust ruling. By limiting third-party app stores, Epic alleges, Samsung and Google are attempting to preserve their control over the Android ecosystem and limit users’ access to alternative sources of apps.

Samsung, in response, has defended its Auto Blocker feature, arguing that it is a vital security tool that protects users from malicious software. A spokesperson for the company described Epic’s claims as “baseless,” stating that Samsung’s devices are designed with user security, privacy, and control in mind. The company emphasized that its features, including Auto Blocker, are intended to safeguard customers rather than restrict competition.

Epic’s lawsuit also highlights Samsung’s significant market share in the U.S. Android phone market, which the company claims gives it an outsized influence over how apps are distributed. According to Epic, Samsung controls 71% of the “premium Android devices” market—phones that cost more than $600—and 57% of the overall U.S. Android smartphone market. Epic argues that with such dominance, Samsung’s decision to restrict third-party app stores through Auto Blocker has far-reaching consequences for both developers and consumers.

This lawsuit is the latest in a series of legal battles Epic has waged against major tech companies. In addition to its case against Google, Epic has also taken on Apple, accusing the company of similar anti-competitive practices with its iOS App Store. Both Google and Apple charge a 30% commission on app sales, a fee that Epic has long criticized as excessive. While Epic’s antitrust claim against Apple was rejected by a judge, the company did win a partial victory when the court ruled that Apple must allow developers to direct users to alternative payment systems.

The dispute over Samsung’s Auto Blocker has also raised questions about how difficult it actually is for users to disable the feature. While Epic claims that a “21-step process” is required to install apps from outside the Google Play Store or Samsung’s Galaxy Store, critics have pointed out that the company’s own support page offers a much simpler, four-step process to turn off Auto Blocker. This discrepancy has fueled debate over whether Samsung’s security measures are truly aimed at protecting users or if they are designed to prevent competition in the app market.

As the legal proceedings continue, the case could have significant implications for the future of app stores and competition in the mobile ecosystem. If Epic prevails, the lawsuit could pave the way for greater openness in the Android app marketplace, potentially benefiting both developers and consumers by offering more options and reducing barriers to entry. However, with Samsung committed to defending its practices, the outcome of the case remains uncertain.