Google's Legal Gauntlet: Antitrust Battles and the Future of the App Ecosystem 

This week on Upwardly Mobile, we dissect the flurry of major legal decisions facing Google in September 2025, from its desperate plea to the Supreme Court to halt the Epic Games injunction to the final ruling in the federal search monopoly case. We explore the massive shifts coming to the Android app ecosystem and Google's mandated business practice changes. Episode Notes September 2025: A Critical Month for Google's Antitrust Defense Google is challenging two massive antitrust rulings simultaneously, initiating what the sources describe as its "last hope" to maintain control over core business functions. Part 1: The Epic Games Showdown at the Supreme Court Google has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene and pause the injunction it received following a major legal loss to Epic Games in October 2024. The company is seeking a decision on the stay by October 17, just days before the injunction is scheduled to take effect around October 20 or 22. The injunction, upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, requires Google to make several fundamental changes to the Google Play Store and the Android app ecosystem:

1. Open the Play Store: Google must allow users to download and use third-party app stores for a period of three years.
2. External Billing: Google is no longer allowed to force developers to use its billing system; developers must be allowed to include external links in apps, enabling users to bypass Google’s billing system.
3. End Pre-Install Deals: Google can no longer make deals around pre-installing the Play Store on phones.

Google argues that this "unprecedented antitrust injunction" will "[create] enormous security and safety risks" by allowing the proliferation of stores that stock "malicious, deceptive or pirated content". Furthermore, Google claims the injunction burdens developers with constantly monitoring numerous stores and makes it substantially easier for developers to avoid compensating Google for services. Epic Games strongly disagrees, stating that Google continues to rely on "flawed security claims" rejected by the jury and the Ninth Circuit. Epic maintains that the injunction should go into effect so consumers and developers can benefit from competition, choices, and lower prices. Part 2: The Search Monopoly Ruling In a separate, long-running federal monopoly case, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled on remedies following his earlier decision that Google had acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in internet search. Key aspects of Judge Mehta's September 2025 ruling include:

• No Divestiture of Chrome/Android: The judge denied the Department of Justice's proposal to force Google to sell its Chrome browser or divest the Android operating system, ruling that the government had "overreached".
• End Exclusive Deals: Google is no longer permitted to strike exclusive deals around the distribution of search, Google Assistant, Gemini, or Chrome. For example, Google cannot require device makers to pre-load its apps in order to gain access to the Play Store.
• Data Sharing: Google must share some of its search data with competitors going forward to narrow the "scale gap" created by exclusive distribution agreements. (Google is not required to share data related to its ads).

Google called the decision "largely a win" but expressed concerns about the requirements to share Search data and the new limits imposed on how Google distributes its services.

🛡️ Sponsored by Approov

As discussions around third-party app stores and sideloading intensify due to the Epic v. Google injunction, the need for robust mobile app security is paramount. Approov provides essential security solutions for developers navigating these new challenges. Approov offers mobile app attestation...