# Epic Games vs. Big Tech: The Conflict Over App Store Monopolization and Samsung’s Auto Blocker
Epic Games, the creator of the hugely successful game *Fortnite*, has found itself in a series of legal confrontations with some of the largest tech corporations globally, such as Apple, Google, and now Samsung. At the heart of these conflicts are issues related to app store monopolies, stringent policies, and the governance of app distribution and monetization on mobile devices. The latest legal action from Epic targets Samsung and Google, specifically addressing Samsung’s new “Auto Blocker” feature, which Epic asserts is intended to hinder competition rather than safeguard users from harmful software.
## The Auto Blocker Debate
Samsung’s Auto Blocker feature, which comes pre-enabled on its smartphones, prevents users from downloading apps from any sources other than the Galaxy Store or the Google Play Store. While users do have the option to turn off this feature, doing so necessitates navigating a somewhat complex procedure, which Epic contends is deliberately challenging to dissuade users from exploring alternative app stores.
According to Samsung and Google, the Auto Blocker is aimed at protecting users from potentially dangerous apps from unverified sources. Nevertheless, Epic Games contends that the principal aim of this feature is not security but rather preserving control over the app ecosystem and restricting competition. Epic’s CEO, Tim Sweeney, has been outspoken about his view that the feature is a calculated effort to obstruct rival app stores, including Epic’s own platform, from gaining momentum.
### Epic’s Legal Position
In its legal filing, Epic asserts that Samsung and Google have constructed an inequitable marketplace by failing to provide a straightforward method for third-party app stores to achieve “trusted” status. Epic argues that this situation breaches antitrust laws, as it hinders competition and obliges users to depend on the prevailing app stores, which take a considerable cut of app revenues and in-app transactions.
Curiously, Epic has yet to officially request that its app store be recognized as a trusted source by either Samsung or Google. Instead, the company is centered on the more extensive issue of app store monopolization and the obstacles that inhibit alternative marketplaces from competing fairly.
### The Long Path to Fortnite’s Comeback
Epic’s legal struggles with major tech firms commenced in 2020 when *Fortnite* was taken down from both the Apple App Store and Google Play Store for introducing a direct payment system that circumvented the platforms’ 30% commission on in-app purchases. This action breached the terms of service for both stores, leading to *Fortnite*’s removal and Epic’s ensuing lawsuit, accusing Apple and Google of monopolistic behaviors.
After extensive legal disputes, *Fortnite* has recently made its way back to smartphones, but it remains unavailable on the Google Play Store or Apple App Store in the standard manner. Instead, players must resort to alternate avenues such as Samsung’s Galaxy Store or Epic’s own app store for access. This intricate distribution approach has complicated player access to the game, and Epic argues that features like Samsung’s Auto Blocker only worsen the situation.
### Tim Sweeney’s Campaign Against Big Tech
Epic’s CEO, Tim Sweeney, has cast himself as a defender of app developers and users, arguing that the existing app store framework is flawed and disproportionately favors large tech companies to the detriment of smaller developers. Sweeney has consistently criticized the 30% commission that Apple and Google impose on in-app purchases, labeling it a “tax” that stifles innovation and competition.
In a recent announcement, Sweeney accused Samsung and Google of employing the Auto Blocker feature not for user protection against malware, but to suppress competition from alternative app stores. “The feature is intended to hinder competition,” Sweeney remarked to reporters, expressing hope that the legal process will reveal potential collusion between Samsung and Google in preserving their superiority in the app market.
### The Wider Consequences
Epic’s lawsuit against Samsung and Google represents merely the most recent episode in a broader struggle regarding the future of app distribution. At its essence, the contention is about control—who determines which apps are accessible on mobile devices, how they are disseminated, and the revenue distributions between developers and platforms.
For consumers, the results of these legal struggles could carry substantial consequences. If Epic prevails in its battle against app store monopolies, it might foster an environment with greater choices for users regarding app downloads and payment methods. It could also compel Apple, Google, and other tech giants to reduce their commission rates or allow alternate payment options, potentially resulting in lower costs for consumers.
Conversely, if Samsung and Google successfully uphold their policies, it might reinforce the existing app store model, wherein a handful of large corporations maintain control over most app distribution and retain a sizable percentage of developers’ incomes.
### The Road Ahead
As of now, the lawsuit is still
