Big Tech Goes to SCOTUS? Google’s Petition in Epic v. Google
Google has raised significant legal questions regarding antitrust liability and remedies, signaling similar arguments expected in the DOJ v. Google appeal. Following the Ninth Circuit's decision to uphold stringent remedies against Google in the long-standing Epic v. Google case, the company now aims to bring its appeal before the Supreme Court.
Key Legal Questions Presented
- What is the appropriate legal standard to assess whether Google's revenue sharing, preinstallation, and distribution agreements were anticompetitive?
- Did the imposed remedies, including the extensive catalog-sharing requirement allowing third-party app stores access to Google Play Store, exceed the bounds of proper antitrust relief?
These questions not only impact the outcome of Epic v. Google but also challenge similar rulings in Judge Mehta’s liability and remedy decisions in the concurrent DOJ case.
Primary Issue: Antitrust Liability Standard
The fundamental issue concerns the legal test applied to determine Google's competitive conduct. Google's actions were judged under the rule of reason, a standard established by the Supreme Court in precedents such as NCAA v.
"Specifically, Google’s practices were evaluated under the rule of reason, which, in its standard formulation as set forth by the Supreme Court in cases like NCAA v."
This standard requires analyzing the overall competitive effects rather than deeming conduct illegal per se.
Implications for Antitrust Enforcement
The case raises questions about the scope and nature of antitrust remedies, emphasizing whether courts are empowered to impose far-reaching relief that restructures platform access and distribution. Google's petition highlights concerns about overbroad judicial intervention in competitive business arrangements.
Summary
Google's Supreme Court petition challenges both how antitrust liability is determined under the rule of reason and whether imposed remedies in Epic v. Google exceed lawful boundaries, with implications for ongoing antitrust enforcement.
"Did the relief imposed, including a heavy-handed catalog sharing remedy that gives third-party app stores access to Google Play Store’s extensive network of apps, go beyond the scope of proper antitrust relief?"
Author's summary: Google's petition to the Supreme Court questions the legal standards used to judge its business practices and challenges whether recent antitrust remedies overreach, potentially reshaping future tech litigation.