Google Has 14 Days to Revolutionize Play Store

Google is on the hook for a quick court-ordered reset of major Google Play policies after the Supreme Court declined to delay the remedies issued following Epic Games’ antitrust win. It’s only 14 days on the clock, but Google will have to allow alternative app distribution links, permit external payment options and undo a number of practices that prioritized access to the Play Store — changes that will continue to reverberate across developers and device makers, as well as millions of U.S. Android users.

What the Court Ordered for Google Play Store Policies

The injunction orders Google to unbundle access to the Play Store from its billing system, and to allow app developers to inform customers that there are other ways they can pay for their purchases. Developers should be free to price as low or as high and link out to downloads outside of the Play Store. The decision also prevents Google from negotiating agreements that would allow it to cut deals or offer discounts with manufacturers, carriers or app makers to gain an advantage for the Play Store.

Epic Games’ CEO Tim Sweeney publicly applauded the ruling, discussing it as a victory for open distribution on Android. And although Google is still working on its broader appeal, being denied a stay means that these measures go into place right now — not while an appeal grinds its way through the courts.

Billing, fees, and the new economics of app stores

For years, Google Play Billing has served as the default tollbooth for in-app transactions, with commissions of around 30 percent levied under standard terms and a 15 percent rate for small developers or long-term subscriptions part of Google’s programs. A previous Google pilot program called “User Choice Billing” reduced fees by 4 percentage points for external processors, but left largely in place Google’s cut of greater than 60 percent. To go further, the injunction decouples distribution and Google’s payment rails from a coercive tie and limits retaliatory pricing that would neutralize the value of alternatives.

The practical question now: What fee model works under the court’s rules? Google will argue on behalf of a store-fee structure that covers content delivery, discovery promotion through the Play Store, security screening and use of customer support services — while developers aim for more modest rates underpinned by real costs rather than legacy store margins. data.ai and Sensor Tower have estimated tens of billions of dollars in consumer spending on Google Play annually, meaning even small percentage shifts could change the calculus by billions across the ecosystem.

Sideloading and the safety-versus-access balancing act

While it’s a small archaeological leap, the decision to let developers point users to downloads off the Play Store is an about-face from mobile platforms’ walled-garden defaults. Android already allows sideloading, but friction and policy restrictions keep most of the distribution inside Play. These new policies lower that friction — adding some competition for direct downloads and rival stores — while lifting familiar questions about the threat of (malware) infection and confusion.

Google will in all likelihood have to rely heavily on Play Protect scanning, improved permission prompts and clearer provenance signals to remain secure. The company has previously stressed that central review and automated scanning prevent flat-out millions of harmful apps a year. The moral of the court’s ruling effectively dares Google to shore up those safety guardrails, even as distribution continues to fragment.

Pre-install bargaining and market power in app stores

The order’s prohibition on revenue sharing or benefits related to exclusivity takes aim at the commercial heart of pre-install deals. Those deals have long determined which app stores and services welcome users on new devices. By limiting pay-to-preload behavior, the ruling could create space for more neutral, option-driven onboarding and potentially smooth the path for rival app stores to gain greater ground with manufacturers and carriers.

The stakes are significant. Google has previously said there are more than three billion active Android devices around the world. “Outcomes matter for that long-term reach,” said Herscovici, “because even marginal changes in default placements or store choice at setup by developers can lead to gigantic differences in outreach/revenue for both the platforms and the developers.”

What users and developers will see in the coming weeks

Before long, U.S. users will also notice more conspicuous choices to pay or download away from the Play Store such as in-app links. Developers will have to make new choices, either adding third-party payment providers, lowering prices outside Play Billing or distributing updates directly. Experience may differ by app category — games and services heavy on subscriptions tend to feel fee changes first — while utility apps are more likely to make a slow march forward, lest they incur the support and security overhead.

Google, for its part, indicated in statements reported by a number of outlets that it disagrees with parts of the ruling and will continue to pursue its appeal, which it says pertains to user safety and platform integrity. But time is running out, and the company now has to comply with the court’s order while its legal arguments run their course.

Beyond the two-week window for Google Play compliance

The cures also envision more fundamental changes down the road, including greater distribution for competing app stores and additional access to competitors’ catalogs, based on the results of Google’s appeal. Should the current order stand, Android’s software marketplace may become more pluralistic, processing fees may face real price competition and connections between developers and users might strengthen.

The industry has seen a similar back-and-forth with other mobile ecosystems, but the size of Android — and the court’s focus on anti-steering and anti-tying — makes this moment different. The next 14 days will determine the tenor of how open the Play Store era becomes, and whether Google can thread a needle between ecosystem safety and an actual dose of court-ordered competition.