Epic v. Google: everything we learned in Fortnite court
See all Stories
S
“Not all tying arrangements are unlawful.”
Another jury instruction:
The essential characteristic of an invalid tying arrangement is a seller’s exploitation of its market power over the tying product (app distribution services) to force a buyer to purchase the tied product (in-app billing services) that the buyer might have preferred to purchase elsewhere.
We’re on page 43 now, which lays out what Epic would need to prove to show Google illegally tied the Google Play app store to Google Play Billing.
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
Loading comments
Getting the conversation ready...
Most Popular
Most Popular
- Sam Altman says it’s better for RAM to be in a data center than on your desk
- The Apple Pencil turned the Duo into my new favorite notebook
- I built an AI Tamagotchi before Meta could
- Sam Altman sympathizes with mathematicians, but says OpenAI’s math onslaught won’t stop
- Here’s why you can’t shake those unhinged political texts
