A group of 37 attorneys general filed a second Attorney General Letitia James co-led the suit alongside the Tennessee, North Carolina, and Utah attorneys general. The bipartisan coalition represents 36 U.S. states, including California, Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Colorado, Washington, and the District of Columbia. “Through its illegal conduct, the company has ensured that hundreds of millions of turn to Google, and only Google, for the millions of applications they may choose to download to their phones and tablets,” James said in a press release. “Worse yet, Google is squeezing the lifeblood out of millions of that are only seeking to compete.”Wednesday, accusing the company of abusing its market power to stifle competitors and forcing consumers into in-app payments that grant the company a hefty cut. New York
The Justice Department filed its antitrust case focused on the search last October. In December, 35 app developers and consumers into its payment processing system and then charging high fees,” District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine said., alleging that the company engaged in illegal behavior to maintain a monopoly on the search business. In the new lawsuit embedded below, the bipartisan coalition of states alleges that store. But the fees that Google collects from developers are likely the meat of the case. “Not only has Google acted unlawfully to block potential rivals from competing with its Google Play Store, but it has also profited by improperly locking
Like Apple,, Google Play Billing, and reaps the rewards: a 30 percent cut of all payments. Much of the criticism here is a case that could — and likely will — be made against Apple, which exerts even more control over its app ecosystem. Google doesn’t have an iMessage equivalent exclusive app that keeps users locked in quite the same way. While the lawsuit discusses Google’s “monopoly power” in the app marketplace, the elephant in the room is software space.
The lawsuit argues that consumers face pressure to stay locked into the Android ecosystem, but on the Android side, much of that is ultimately familiarity and sunk costs. The argument on the Apple side of the equation is likely much more robust. The din over tech giants squeezingpayment fees is getting louder. The new multi-state lawsuit is the latest beat, but the topic has been white-hot since Epic took Apple to court over its desire to bypass Apple’s fees by accepting mobile payments outside the . When Epic set up a workaround, , and Epic Games v. Apple was born.