Mario Bautista
Epic today filed a new lawsuit against Google and Samsung, four years after first suing Google over its app store monopoly. This time around, as reported by our friends at 9to5Google, Epic is focused on Samsung’s “Auto Blocker” feature that limits users to installing apps from “authorized sources.”
Sweeney, however, continues to falsely claim that Epic is fighting on behalf of “all developers,” not just Epic itself.
Samsung’s Auto Blocker feature is enabled by default on Samsung devices, and Epic’s lawsuit aims to have the feature declared unlawful and removed or turned off by default. According to Epic, the Auto Blocker feature “cements the Google Play Store as the only viable way to get apps on Samsung devices, blocking every other store from competing on a level playing field.”
In a roundtable interview with The Verge, Sweeney claimed that he is once again fighting on behalf of all developers, not just Epic:
“If we’d fought Epic v. Apple and Epic v. Google solely on the basis of Epic getting special privileges, perhaps settlement discussions with Apple and Google might have been fruitful,” says Sweeney. “But if we did that, we’d be selling out all developers.”
A quick Google search, however, tells you otherwise. During Epic’s lawsuit against Apple, Sweeney was asked whether he would’ve accepted a special deal from Apple for a lower App Store commission.
Sweeney, despite claiming he was fighting Apple on behalf of all developers, said that he would have done exactly that:
Lawyer: If Apple had told you that it would offer you a deal and no other developers, would you have accepted that?
Sweeney: Yes, I would have.
In essence, Sweeney admitted he would’ve been totally ok with “selling out all developers.”
Apple went on to secure a “resounding victory” in that lawsuit. The outcome of Epic’s latest Google and Samsung lawsuit remains to be seen, but in the interim, we’ve secured another example of Sweeney’s disingenuous framing.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
