Sean Hollister

He also argues the Play Store and Android provide more value than the simple payment processing fees charged by PayPal or Stripe.

In the Epic v. Apple case, the judge agreed Apple deserved something for the platform — but not necessarily 30 percent. (Nobody can tell the jury that, though.)

He says Apple will explain that Google’s Play Store is its primary competitor for apps. Which sounds obvious, but hey, market definition.

“Epic’s going to ask you to believe the App Store and the Play Store don’t compete. They’re going to try to break the phone apart as if the app store and the phone don’t relate to each other,” says Pomerantz.

“A billion people have done it after getting notified of the potential risks,” says Pomerantz about sideloading apps. “That’s because Android users have a real choice.”

Also: “Security is really important to competition — we need to protect users because it’s a critical point of competition between Apple and Android,” he says.

“All the AFA did was set up some basic standards so Android phones have things in common — so Android developers could just build one version of the app, saving time and money, so it could run on a Motorola phone or a Nokia phone or an LG phone or any other phone.”

Epic will likely argue that these agreements were a kingmaker for Google’s app store.

“When they show these charts that show all these downloads from Play and not from the Galaxy Store, that’s what the Samsung phone users are choosing. They’re touching Play. Nothing’s keeping them from touching the Galaxy Store; it’s just what works for them,” argues Google.

That’s a shot at the heart of Epic’s case, which is that Google is preventing competition in Android app stores, not mobile phones or app stores in general.

Follow along with our live updates from the trial:

Bornstein also says the evidence will show there are “a lot of other ways” to protect against malicious apps than Google’s current practices. (Google will argue that Epic is demanding it remove the security protections that keep you safe.)

(Judge Donato told Epic it was at its time limit, and Epic wrapped up quickly.)

“All we know is whatever is in the destroyed chats, as bad as the documents are, is worse. Or at least it was worse, before they were destroyed,” Epic attorney Gary Bornstein told the jury.

You see, Epic planned the whole legal trap for Google, calling it Project Liberty, where it tried to bypass Google’s (and Apple’s) fees with its own payment system buried in the code.

Epic is admitting this but says the code isn’t as scary as Google will claim: “You will not see any evidence that anyone was harmed by this or even could have been harmed by this.”