Epic Games Beat Google in Court. Here Is Where That Injunction Stands Now.

The Google Case: Verdict, Then Injunction

A federal jury in the Northern District of California found that Google's Play Store and its in-app billing service together constitute an illegal monopoly. The jury deliberated less than four hours. It found Google had monopoly power in both Android app distribution and in-app billing, and that Google's conduct harmed Epic's business, according to Courthouse News.

Epic's lawyers acknowledged in court that the company had deliberately bypassed Google's billing rules by routing Fortnite purchases around Google's payment system specifically to provoke a legal confrontation. That admission did not hurt Epic. The jury agreed the underlying market structure was the problem.

On October 7, 2024, U.S. District Judge James Donato entered a nationwide three-year permanent injunction against Google, according to Cravath, Swaine & Moore, the law firm that represented Epic. The injunction prohibits Google from paying competitors to stay out of the Android app distribution market. It also requires Google to distribute rival app stores through the Play Store itself and to give those alternative stores access to the Play Store's full app catalog.

Epic CEO Tim Sweeney celebrated on X after the jury verdict: "Victory over Google! After 4 weeks of detailed court testimony, the California jury found against the Google Play monopoly on all counts."

Google's vice president of government affairs Wilson White pushed back. "Android and Google Play provide more choice and openness than any other major mobile platform," White said, adding that Google competes with Apple, other Android stores, and gaming consoles. Google said it would challenge the verdict.

Google's Appeal: The Ninth Circuit Rules

Google's defense was not frivolous. Android, unlike iOS, already allows users to sideload apps outside the Play Store entirely. Google argued throughout trial that the relevant competitive market should include Apple's App Store, and that the market was defined too narrowly.

On July 31, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the jury verdict against Google and also unanimously affirmed the district court's permanent injunction, according to Cravath. The Ninth Circuit upheld the finding that Google engaged in illegal anticompetitive behavior in the distribution of mobile apps and in the handling of in-app payments. The injunction prohibits Google from providing benefits to phone manufacturers, app developers, and others in exchange for favoring the Google Play Store.

The Apple Track: Contempt and a Supreme Court Refusal

Epic's case against Apple ran on a separate track and produced a different outcome at trial. Epic mostly lost that case in 2021, when the court found Apple did not violate federal antitrust law, but the judge did order Apple to allow developers to link users to outside payment options.

Apple dragged its feet on that order, according to Epic. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found Apple in contempt of the lower court's directive. On December 11, 2025, the Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court's finding that Apple committed civil contempt based on Apple's willful violations of the permanent injunction, according to Cravath. The Court of Appeals affirmed several contempt sanctions while modifying or reversing in part certain other sanctions and remanding to the district court for further proceedings. The court also denied Apple's request to reassign the case to a different district judge on remand.

Apple then asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block enforcement. The Supreme Court declined that request, according to GamesBeat's report citing Reuters.

Sweeney responded on X: "Great news — the Supreme Court denied Apple's delay tactics. Now we head back to the District Court to determine what Apple can charge for only the necessary costs of implementing external purchase links."

The fee question is consequential. Apple has argued it is entitled to a commission even on purchases made through external links, which Epic contests. The district court still has to put a number on what Apple can legally charge, and that proceeding has not concluded.

Fortnite's return to storefronts has been uneven. It is back on Google Play worldwide following a settlement between Epic and Google, per GamesBeat. On the Apple side, Fortnite is back in the U.S. App Store, the EU, and Australia. In Japan, users can access Fortnite only through Epic's web store. It is not available in the Japanese Apple App Store.

What the Injunction Actually Forces Google to Do

The practical scope of the October 2024 injunction against Google is broad. Google must:

• Allow competing app stores to be distributed through the Play Store itself
• Give rival stores access to the Play Store's full catalog of apps
• Stop paying potential competitors — including phone manufacturers, app developers, and others — to favor the Google Play Store

That last provision matters because evidence presented at trial suggested Google had paid some game developers and device manufacturers to avoid building competing stores. The injunction targets that practice directly.

The three-year clock on the injunction means it runs through approximately late 2027. With the Ninth Circuit having unanimously affirmed both the verdict and the injunction, the injunction's durability no longer hinges on that appellate question — though further legal challenges remain possible.