Epic wins again: US court forces Google Play to open to alternative payments - what does it mean for developers worldwide?

• California’s federal court ordered Google to permit alternative payment systems within Android apps and allow external communication of pricing and discounts.
• Google is required to follow the new rules until at least November 1st, 2027, unless any challenges prove successful.

Alexandra Kurdyumova is Futura co-founder and CEO. Alina Davletshina is Futura head of digital practice.

Finally, an injunction in Epic Games vs Google took effect on October 31st, 2025 (Halloween!).

For the first time, the US Google Play Store must legally allow developers to use third-party payment systems and communicate prices outside the store. This is a decisive moment in the long-running debate over gatekeeper control and revenue-sharing.

California’s federal court ordered Google to:

• Permit alternative billing and payment systems within Android apps distributed through Google Play.
• Stop requiring developers to adjust prices based on whether Google Play Billing is used.
• Allow external communication of pricing and discounts, and direct download links.
• Maintain these obligations under injunction until November 1st, 2027.

Google confirmed the change to comply with the judgment, while noting it will "share more details on business-model adjustments to preserve user trust and safety".

A familiar echo of the Apple case

The Epic vs Google ruling mirrors the Apple case but goes much further. Epic’s win against Google doesn’t just challenge payment rules - it forces Android to open the gates.

In the Apple case, developers were allowed to tell users about cheaper external payments but Apple kept full control of its App Store. With Google, the court went further: developers can now use their own payment systems and distribute apps outside of Google Play.

It’s a deeper disruption: not just a crack in the wall, but a new way forward for mobile games and monetisation.

This matters for Apple too. Even though the case targeted Google, the pressure on Apple is growing. Developers and regulators alike will use this ruling as a benchmark to demand more openness from Apple’s ecosystem, especially as DMA enforcement ramps up in the EU.

Legal convergence with the EU’s Digital Markets Act

What is unfolding in the US aligns with the EU’s Digital Markets Act, which designates Google and Apple as "gatekeepers" and explicitly forbids them from restricting third-party billing, app stores, or in-app linking (Articles 5 and 6, DMA).

Under EU law, both companies are already introducing user-choice billing and alternative app store mechanisms, albeit wrapped in new service-fee models (for instance, Apple’s Core Technology Fee).

In many ways, this brings US antitrust enforcement closer to the EU’s DMA, rather than leading the charge. Now, the US injunction pushes Google toward similar openness, ensuring it cannot maintain dual, region-specific regimes that contradict each other.

In effect, Epic’s courtroom victory in the US reinforces the DMA’s global reach: legal precedents and digital competition policy are converging across the Atlantic.

Google’s legal fight isn’t over yet

Google already filed a petition with the US Supreme Court requesting to block the injunction, but on October 6th, 2025, that request was denied. That means the new rules took effect on October 31st and are now legally binding.

But this was just round one.

Google is widely expected to continue the legal fight - and the next steps could take months or even years. All that time, the company must still comply with the court’s decision.

So what’s next? Google may file a full petition asking the Supreme Court to take up the entire case, not just the injunction. If accepted, this would open the door to a potential reversal of the decision. But Supreme Court acceptance rates are low (around 1%).

In parallel, Google could also challenge specific parts of the ruling in lower courts or seek to delay implementation through procedural motions.

Until any of these efforts succeed, Google is legally required to follow the new rules until at least November 1st, 2027.

In plain English: Google hasn’t given up. A long legal battle is ahead - but for now, the rules have changed and developers should act like they’re here to stay.

Why this matters for publishers and payment firms

For game developers and digital publishers, the implications are immediate:

• Freedom of payment architecture - developers may integrate direct checkout via Stripe, Paddle, crypto processors, or their own merchant accounts.
• Transparent pricing strategy - lower prices can finally be offered outside Play without breaching "price parity" clauses.
• Re-emergence of direct-to-consumer models - publishers can drive subscriptions and IAP revenue through owned channels.

Payment providers and fintechs will also benefit, as the Android ecosystem becomes fertile ground for alternative checkout innovation, micro-payment solutions, and player-centric loyalty programmes.

While the ruling opens the door, Google will likely design safety and certification layers for external payments, citing user protection concerns. These may include security audits, refund procedures and transaction-integrity rules.

Such measures, if too onerous, could become a "shadow barrier", formally permitting alternatives, but practically deterring smaller studios from leaving Google Play Billing. Moreover, the company’s petition for a US Supreme Court stay remains pending, meaning the legal battle is not entirely over.

Android vs Apple: What makes Google’s fight unique?

If the battle does reach the Supreme Court, Google is likely to borrow Apple’s main arguments - including the right to control its own platform and ensure user safety.

But Google may also bring up something Apple cannot: the fact that Android already allows sideloading and third-party app stores. This "ecosystem openness" could become a key argument in favour of Google - or against it, depending on how regulators frame user harm and control.

This makes the Android case a fascinating remix of the Apple drama, with the potential to reshape app economy rules even more deeply.

Until November 2027, the injunction creates an experimental zone for mobile monetisation. Developers who build their payment autonomy now, as Apple and Google face synchronised antitrust pressure, will be best positioned when the post-gatekeeper era becomes permanent.

One more element worth noting is the joint request recently submitted by Epic and Google to amend the existing injunction. If approved, this amendment would effectively turn the current order on its head by weakening the core restrictions imposed by the court after the trial.

In practice, both parties are attempting to reshape the enforcement framework in a way that would significantly limit the injunction’s impact on Google’s app-distribution and monetisation conduct.

This development has already raised concerns among observers: a revised injunction could allow Google to retain much of its practical control over Android distribution, undermining the force of the original ruling.

For the gaming sector, this is more than an American courtroom drama.