### Epic Games Files Suit Against Samsung Over Auto Blocker Feature: A Fresh Antitrust Conflict
Epic Games, the creator of the renowned game *Fortnite* and the Epic Games Store, finds itself once again in a legal dispute, alleging anti-competitive behaviors in the mobile application market. Following its prominent lawsuit against Google that culminated in a notable antitrust win, Epic is now targeting Samsung. This new legal action, filed in federal court, focuses on Samsung’s “Auto Blocker” feature, which Epic contends unfairly hampers competition within the Android app landscape.
#### What Does the Auto Blocker Feature Entail?
Last year, Samsung launched the Auto Blocker feature as an opt-in security option meant to stop Galaxy smartphone users from acquiring apps from “unauthorized” third-party platforms. Initially switched off by default, users were given the choice to activate it. However, after a system update in July 2024, Auto Blocker is now enabled by default during the initial setup of new Samsung Galaxy devices. Users still have the option to disable it during setup or later in the phone’s settings, but the default activation has sparked concerns, mainly from Epic Games.
The Auto Blocker feature aims to safeguard users from potentially harmful applications by limiting downloads from sources that Samsung hasn’t clearly authorized. This encompasses third-party app stores like the Epic Games Store, which recently introduced its Android version. While Samsung defends this feature as a security precaution, Epic asserts that its true aim is to suppress competition.
#### Epic’s Claims: A Veiled Monopoly?
Epic’s lawsuit challenges Samsung’s lack of a transparent procedure for third-party app stores, such as the Epic Games Store, to achieve “authorized” status under the Auto Blocker system. According to the suit, this implies that any app store not pre-approved by Samsung is automatically denied, irrespective of its safety or security.
“Although Samsung superficially professes that Auto Blocker is a security feature, the practical effect is to prevent all competing stores from operating, regardless of their safety or security—without any evaluation of their safety or security or a route for other stores to gain ‘authorization,'” the lawsuit claims.
Epic contends that this effectively builds a “moat” around Google’s Play Store, the only major app store unaffected by the Auto Blocker. Epic argues that this reestablishes the anti-competitive behaviors that were partially undone during the *Epic v. Google* trial, which determined that Google’s dominance in the Android app market breached antitrust regulations.
#### The Samsung-Google Link
A key component of Epic’s position is the connection between Samsung and Google. The lawsuit posits that Samsung’s choice to enable Auto Blocker by default was not accidental but a carefully coordinated initiative with Google to safeguard the Play Store’s supremacy. Epic notes that the timing of the Auto Blocker update—coinciding with the launch of third-party app stores like the Epic Games Store on Android—raises questions about possible collusion.
The lawsuit also mentions arguments presented during the *Epic v. Google* trial, where Epic charged Google with compensating Samsung to prevent its Galaxy Store from genuinely competing with the Play Store. Despite the Samsung Galaxy Store being accessible on 40 percent of Android devices, it accounts for only about 1 percent of Android app downloads, a figure Epic cites as proof of Google’s excessive influence.
“In the absence of a deal between Samsung and Google, it would be irrational for Samsung (or any firm in its situation) to further entrench the Play Store monopoly,” the lawsuit asserts.
#### Samsung’s Response
In reaction to the lawsuit, Samsung has rejected any allegations of wrongdoing and committed to “vigorously defending against Epic Games’ unfounded claims.” The company stressed that the Auto Blocker feature is built with user security and privacy at the forefront.
“The features integrated into our devices comply with Samsung’s fundamental principles of security, privacy, and user empowerment, and we remain dedicated to protecting users’ personal data,” Samsung stated.
Samsung also highlighted that users can effortlessly disable the Auto Blocker feature if they wish to install apps from third-party sources, implying that the feature does not effectively obstruct competition.
#### Wider Consequences
This legal action marks the latest episode in Epic Games’ sustained initiative to confront what it perceives as monopolistic practices in the mobile app sector. The company has been an outspoken opponent of both Google and Apple, accusing them of leveraging their control over app distribution to suppress competition and impose excessive fees on developers.
Epic’s legal confrontations have already led to notable implications. The *Epic v. Apple* trial, while not a total triumph for Epic, resulted in some adjustments to Apple’s App Store policies, including allowing developers to guide users toward alternative payment methods. The *Epic v. Google* case, which concluded with a jury finding that Google’s Play Store breached antitrust laws, also signifies the impact of Epic’s ongoing legal endeavors.
