[ad_1]
The new suit makes heavy reference to arguments from the Epic v. Google case alleging that an informal agreement between Samsung and Google has prevented the Samsung Galaxy Store from becoming a true competitor to the Google Play store. The suit notes that, while the Samsung Store is available on 40 percent of all Android phones, it represents only about 1 percent of all Android app downloads.
The lawsuit also calls attention to the timing of Samsung’s decision to turn on Auto Blocker by default just as Epic and other third-party App Stores were launching on Android. That timing is especially suspicious, according to the lawsuit, in light of Samsung’s initial Auto Blocker announcement last year, which left the feature off by default because, as Samsung put it, “[t]here are many benefits to intentional sideloading, such as enhanced customization and control over a device’s functionality.”
This fact pattern forms the core of Samsung’s argument that implementing Auto Blocker by default must have been “a coordinated decision by Google and Samsung to circumvent” the results of the Epic v. Google lawsuit. While the suit doesn’t provide any concrete evidence that such an agreement exists, it argues that “absent an agreement between Samsung and Google, it would be irrational for Samsung (or any company in its position) to entrench the Play Store monopoly.”
In a statement, Samsung said it planned to “vigorously contest Epic Games’ baseless claims… The features integrated into its devices are designed in accordance with Samsung’s core principles of security, privacy, and user control, and we remain fully committed to safeguarding users’ personal data.”
[ad_2]
Source link
