Google Admits in Urgent Filing It Must Begin Opening Android in Two Weeks

Shortly after Epic's second major antitrust win against Google, it remained unclear how quickly the tech giant would be forced to dismantle its now legally-confirmed monopoly.

Google has now revealed the timeline: a mere 14 days. The company has two weeks to implement sweeping reforms to its Google Play store and its commercial dealings with phonemakers, carriers, and developers, unless it secures an emergency pause from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The mandated changes include ending the requirement to use Google Play Billing, permitting developers to direct users to alternative platforms, and restricting incentives for app preinstallation.

However, Epic's most significant court victories are not yet in effect. The current order does not compel Google to host rival app stores within Google Play or to share its entire app catalog with them. Therefore, the immediate arrival of stores like the Epic Games Store or Microsoft Xbox Store on Google Play is not expected.

As of Friday afternoon, this entire process has likely been delayed. Shortly after our initial report, Google was granted its emergency stay, securing at least three additional weeks before any changes to Android's app store policies must occur.

Related

• Epic's second victory over Google could fundamentally reshape Android
• The Epic Games Store is preparing to bring Fortnite back to Google Play
• Microsoft reveals a built but unreleased Xbox game store for Android
• Judge rules Google must open Android to third-party app stores

When issuing the permanent injunction to open up the Android ecosystem, Judge James Donato gave Google an eight-month window to design a "narrowly tailored" security framework before being required to host rival stores. With the stays now in place, Google retains roughly seven and a half months of that timeline once the pauses are lifted, meaning competing stores likely won't appear inside Google Play until 2026 at the earliest.

Google's emergency stay request argued that several changes were required far too quickly, stating that "the remedies in 4-7, 9-10, and 13 of the District Court’s injunction will go into effect in 14 days." Google labeled this an emergency, claiming a 14-day implementation would have a "significant impact" on millions of users and over 500,000 developers, "exposing them to substantial risks" and "jeopardizing the entire Android ecosystem."

So, what do remedies 4-7, 9, 10, and 13 entail? They are the provisions that:

• Prohibit Google from forcing developers to use Google Play Billing
• Allow Android developers to inform users about alternative payment options from within the Play Store
• Permit developers to link to external download sources for their apps
• Let developers set their own pricing
• Bar financial incentives or perks to phonemakers, carriers, and developers for Play Store exclusivity or preinstallation
• Require Google to cooperate with Epic on a system for integrating rival app stores

Several of these measures echo changes Epic secured in its antitrust case against Apple. They target so-called anti-steering rules, which courts in both major cases have now agreed unfairly restrict developer access to a competitive marketplace.

The full text of the required remedies from Judge Donato's injunction is below:

4. For a period of three years ending on November 1, 2027, Google may not share revenue generated by the Google Play Store with any person or entity that distributes Android apps, or has stated that it will launch or is considering launching an Android app distribution platform or store.

5. For a period of three years ending on November 1, 2027, Google may not condition a payment, revenue share, or access to any Google product or service, on an agreement by an app developer to launch an app first or exclusively in the Google Play Store.

6. For a period of three years ending on November 1, 2027, Google may not condition a payment, revenue share, or access to any Google product or service, on an agreement by an app developer not to launch on a third-party Android app distribution platform or store a version of an app that includes features not available in, or is otherwise different from, the version of the app offered on the Google Play Store.

7. For a period of three years ending on November 1, 2027, Google may not condition a payment, revenue share, or access to any Google product or service, on an agreement with an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) or carrier to preinstall the Google Play Store on any specific location on an Android device.

9. For a period of three years ending on November 1, 2027, Google may not require the use of Google Play Billing in apps distributed on the Google Play Store, or prohibit the use of in-app payment methods other than Google Play Billing. Google may not prohibit a developer from communicating with users about the availability of a payment method other than Google Play Billing. Google may not require a developer to set a price based on whether Google Play Billing is used.

10. For a period of three years ending on November 1, 2027, Google may not prohibit a developer from communicating with users about the availability or pricing of an app outside the Google Play Store, and may not prohibit a developer from providing a link to download the app outside the Google Play Store.

13. Within thirty days of the date of this order, the parties will recommend to the Court a three-person Technical Committee. Epic and Google will each select one member of the Technical Committee, and those two members will select the third member. After appointment by the Court, the Technical Committee will review disputes or issues relating to the technology and processes required by the preceding provisions. If the Technical Committee cannot resolve a dispute or issue, a party may ask the Court for a resolution. The Technical Committee may not extend any deadline set in this order, but may recommend that the Court accept or deny a request to extend. Each party will bear the cost of compensating their respective party-designated committee member for their work on the committee. The third member’s fees will be paid by the parties in equal share.

When asked how these remedies could "expose users and developers to substantial risks," Google directed us to a document arguing that allowing external download links could increase exposure to malware, and that removing Play Billing might compromise payment security and user expectations.

Although a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel had previously denied Google's stay request and affirmed the injunction's validity, it granted this emergency pause to allow Google to argue for a longer stay as higher courts consider the case. Google has indicated potential appeals to the full Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court.

You can read Google's full emergency stay request below:

Updated August 1st: Added that Google has been granted its emergency stay and its response to our inquiry.