Firstly and somewhat incredibly, this is the first time a Big Tech firm has lost an antitrust case in the U.S., as competition wonk Matt Stoller pointed out in a blog post yesterday. Antitrust cases have obviously effected change in the sector before—see Microsoft’s 2001 settlement with the Justice Department—but this is different. The verdict may eventually have a broader impact across Silicon Valley, though right now it’s Google’s problem.

Stoller: “Google is likely to be in trouble now, because it is facing multiple antitrust cases, and these kinds of decisions have a bandwagon effect. The precedent is set, in every case going forward the firm will now be seen as presumed guilty, since a jury found Google has violated antitrust laws. Judges are cautious, and are generally afraid of being the first to make a precedent-setting decision. Now they won’t have to. In fact, judges and juries will now have to find a reason to rule for Google.”

Here’s another key point from that piece, relating to the wider implications of nailing Google over “tying”—the antitrust issue that was also central to that vintage Microsoft case: “The specific legal claim here was about how Google forced firms relying on its Google Play app store to also use its Google Play billing service, which charges an inflated price of 30% of the price of an app. Tying is pervasive throughout the economy, so you can expect more suits along these lines.”

More specifically—but no less dramatically—Epic CEO Tim Sweeney may now get his desired outcome of the court forcing Google to let the games firm bypass the Play billing system in the U.S., when selling its games.

That’s not yet a sure thing, as Judge James Donato still needs to decide on the remedies he’s going to impose on Google, which is going to appeal the verdict anyway. But it’s going to be really hard for Google to claim that such an opening-up of the Android ecosystem is out of the question, given that it’s going to have to make similar changes elsewhere very soon.

As of early March 2024, Big Tech services that the European Commission has designated as “gatekeepers” will have to comply with tough new competition obligations contained in the minty-fresh Digital Markets Act. Both Android and Google Play have been designated, which will vastly boost the viability of third-party app stores that could charge far lower commissions than Google’s 30%. In the case of Apple, it will force the company to allow third-party app stores for the first time, with the same ultimate effect. Maybe Sweeney will even get the cross-platform gaming app store he’s been advocating for.

The European app scene is going to look very different in a year or two, and now Americans are closer to being able to enjoy the same changes. More news below.

David Meyer

Want to send thoughts or suggestions to Data Sheet? Drop a line here.

NEWSWORTHY

SIGNIFICANT FIGURES

11%

—The drop in Oracle’s share price on Tuesday, the morning after the company issued a gloomy cloud growth forecast that it blamed on supply constraints.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT

Box CEO Aaron Levie’s top takeaway from OpenAI meltdown: ‘Don’t have weird corporate structures’, by Kylie Robison

Google VP Sissie Hsiao: the Gemini AI demo video ‘is completely real,’ though Google ‘did shorten parts for brevity’, by Kylie Robison

Most companies using AI are ‘lighting money on fire,’ says Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince, by Sage Lazzaro

Khan Academy’s founder says AI ‘coaches’ will soon submit essays to teachers instead of students, by Alexandra Sternlicht

Sam Altman says he doesn’t mind being humanity’s lightning rod for AI fears during his first appearance since surprise firing and return, by Eleanor Pringle

New Hampshire military contractor becomes first plant to get CHIPS funding as U.S. steps up its manufacturing war with China, by the Associated Press

Tucker Carlson, fired by Fox earlier this year, launches his own streaming service, by Chris Morris

Elon Musk says he’s prepared to go to prison if U.S. government tries to censor X, by Christiaan Hetzner

BEFORE YOU GO

Whither Section 702? Wired has a good piece on the dueling legislative proposals for what to do with Section 702, the soon-to-expire surveillance program that’s meant to allow the monitoring of foreigners’ communications, but that also happens to scoop up a ton of Americans’ communications as well.

As the article explains, the House Judiciary Committee’s proposal would (finally!) mean the FBI would have to get warrants before accessing Americans’ communications, rather than just paying companies for the information, as currently happens. The House Intelligence Committee’s bill would offer no such protections, while actually expanding the variety of companies that would be forced to hand over Americans’ communications, to include everyone from co-working spaces to hotels that offer internet access.

White House advisors are apparently coordinating intelligence agencies’ lobbying efforts to advance the latter bill.