Epic v. Google: everything we learned in Fortnite court
See all Stories
S
Epic claims Project Banyan was “just one incident in a long history of Samsung and Google agreeing not to compete in one way or another.”
“Samsung knew what it meant,” says Bornstein, pointing out that Samsung documents show it judged the proposal as designed to “prevent unnecessary competition on store,” But though Bornstein admits Google never went through with Project Banyan, he’s attempting to show the jury that Samsung and Google were closer than competitors.
We’re looking at evidence we’ve seen before, like former Google Play Store head Jamie Rosenberg’s assertion that “any sort of rev share arrangement with Samsung is that we’d achieve structural alignment on business model.”
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
- Sam Altman sympathizes with mathematicians, but says OpenAI’s math onslaught won’t stop
- I built an AI Tamagotchi before Meta could
- Here’s why you can’t shake those unhinged political texts
