Hãy viết lại bài viết dài kèm hashtag về việc đánh giá sản phẩm và mua ngay tại Queen Mobile bằng tiếng VIệt: Following Epic verdict, Google releases settlement in another antitrust case

Mua ngay sản phẩm tại Việt Nam:
QUEEN MOBILE chuyên cung cấp điện thoại Iphone, máy tính bảng Ipad, đồng hồ Smartwatch và các phụ kiện APPLE và các giải pháp điện tử và nhà thông minh. Queen Mobile rất hân hạnh được phục vụ quý khách….
_____________________________________________________
Mua #Điện_thoại #iphone #ipad #macbook #samsung #xiaomi #poco #oppo #snapdragon giá tốt, hãy ghé [𝑸𝑼𝑬𝑬𝑵 𝑴𝑶𝑩𝑰𝑳𝑬] ✿ 149 Hòa Bình, phường Hiệp Tân, quận Tân Phú, TP HCM
✿ 402B, Hai Bà Trưng, P Tân Định, Q 1, HCM
✿ 287 đường 3/2 P 10, Q 10, HCM
Hotline (miễn phí) 19003190
Thu cũ đổi mới
Rẻ hơn hoàn tiền
Góp 0%

Thời gian làm việc: 9h – 21h.

KẾT LUẬN

Hãy viết đoạn tóm tắt về nội dung bằng tiếng việt kích thích người mua: Following Epic verdict, Google releases settlement in another antitrust case

Google was just handed a loss in court, with the company being found guilty by a jury on all charges brought forward by Epic. The case was concerned with Google’s monopolistic tendencies around the Play Store and how it makes it difficult for other players to establish competing app stores. In a similar case, the company has now published a settlement agreement, which could shine some light on what we could expect in the Epic case early next year.

The case in question was brought forward by all 50 state attorneys general in the US, with a settlement reached back in September this year. The details of this agreement have now been made public. Google is forced to pay $700 million and make some tweaks to its app distribution and payment system.

First and foremost, sideloading apps is supposed to become easier. Rather than jumping through a pop-up with scary security-focused language and an extra toggle to flip in settings when giving another app the permission to install an APK, you will only have to go through one unified screen that will read: “Your phone currently isn’t configured to install apps from this source. Granting this source permission to install apps could place your phone and data at risk.”

Then, the company has to implement an alternative billing system for its US customers. It’s calling it User Choice Billing. Like in other countries, this would make it possible for consumers to select a different payment method than Google Play’s default in-app purchase system. Google confirmed to The Verge that it would still charge a platform fee that’s basically a discounted version of the usual Play payment fee, reduced by 4%. Rather than paying 30% to Google, developers would only have to pay 26% when they opt for a different payment method. These savings may be eaten up by charges from alternative payment providers, though.

Developers of entertainment apps should also be able to show different pricing options within the app itself to make clear which is the most beneficial one for its customers, though it looks like they’re still not allowed to actually link to the place users have to go to take advantage of the offer.

If a manufacturer wants to set up an alternative app store, it must now be possible to add it right to the home screen on newly purchased devices. The company also vows to not stop OEMs from giving alternative app stores installer permissions right out of the gate. Google has always allowed manufacturers to have alternative app stores ready to use, but it’s now making the process easier.

Google will also have to pay out $630 million to consumers who were found to have overpaid for in-app purchases. There are a few more concessions the company has to follow, but this is the gist of it. A full 68-page legal document lists them all.

Reactions from Google and Epic

In its statement on the settlement, Google makes clear that it sees its own ecosystem as the better one for people who value an open approach: “Android and Google Play provide choices and opportunities for innovation that other platforms we compete against simply don’t – from allowing for multiple app stores and avenues of app distribution to piloting new ways for users to pay for in-app purchases.”

The company also referenced the Epic case, saying “Android and Google Play have continuously evolved to provide more flexibility and choice in response to feedback from developers and regulators, as well as intense competition from Apple and app stores across the open Android ecosystem. We demonstrated this in the recent trial and were disappointed that the verdict did not recognize the choice and competition that our platforms enable.”

At the same time, Epic’s CEO Tim Sweeney isn’t happy with the settlement reached in the case against the attorneys general. He posted on X: “The State Attorneys General settlement is an injustice to all Android users and developers. It endorses Google’s misleading and anticompetitive scare screens, which Google intentionally designed to disadvantage competing stores and direct downloads.”

Implications for the Epic v. Google case

It’s true that in the grand scheme of things, the settlement works in Google’s favor. The company has had to make similar concessions in other regions already, offering similar alternative billing methods that aren’t used by many developers. In those regions, the company charges the same high alternative platform fee, so there isn’t really any monetary incentive for developers to switch to another option. Sideloading also only got slightly easier, so it might still be intimidating enough for people not familiar with it. On top of this, all the agreements made are only in place for a limited time, ranging from four to seven years. After that period of time, Google can switch things up again in its own favor.

If the settlement is anything to judge the Epic case by, Google may come away pretty unscathed even though it was found guilty. It’s likely that the battle between Google and Epic will drag on for a long time, in any case, since Google has already made clear that it wants to appeal the decision in a higher court. It’s certainly possible that the legal disagreement could go all the way up to the Supreme Court in the end.

Xem chi tiết và đăng ký