Google’s Antitrust Headaches Compound with Another Trial, This One Targeting Its Play Store 

A bicyclist rides along a path at Google's Bay View campus in Mountain View, California, on June 27, 2022. (AFP)
A bicyclist rides along a path at Google's Bay View campus in Mountain View, California, on June 27, 2022. (AFP)
TT

Google’s Antitrust Headaches Compound with Another Trial, This One Targeting Its Play Store 

A bicyclist rides along a path at Google's Bay View campus in Mountain View, California, on June 27, 2022. (AFP)
A bicyclist rides along a path at Google's Bay View campus in Mountain View, California, on June 27, 2022. (AFP)

Google on Monday will try to protect a lucrative piece of its internet empire at the same time it’s still entangled in the biggest US antitrust trial in a quarter century.

The latest threat will unfold in a San Francisco federal court, where a 10-person jury will decide whether Google's digital payment processing system in the Play Store that distributes apps for phones running on its Android software has been illegally driving up prices for consumers and developers.

The trial before US District Judge James Donato is scheduled to last until just before Christmas and include testimony from longtime Google executive Sundar Pichai, who is now CEO of the company's parent, Alphabet Inc.

Pichai recently took the witness stand in Washington DC during an antitrust trial pitting Google's long-running dominance of internet search against the US Justice Department's attempt to undercut it on the grounds the the company has been abusing its power to stifle competition and innovation.

The case targeting Google's Play Store is being brought by Epic Games, the maker of the popular Fortnite video game, which lost in a similar 2021 trial focused on many of the same issues in Apple's iPhone app store.

Although a federal judge sided with Apple on most fronts in that trial, the outcome opened one potential crack in the digital fortress that the company has built around the iPhone.

The judge and an appeals court both determined Apple should allow apps to provide links to other payment options, a change that could undermine the 15% to 30% commissions that both Apple and Google collect on digital purchases made within a mobile app. Apple is appealing that part of the ruling to the US Supreme Court, where Epic is also challenging most elements of the case that it lost.

Epic is now taking aim at Google's commission system, even though Android software is already set up to allow other stores, such as Samsung's installed on its phones, distribute apps that work on the operating system. Even so, Epic maintains that Google still maintains a stranglehold on the Android app ecosystem and the payment system attached to it — and has paid hundreds of millions of dollars to stifle competition.

Much like Apple did in its trial, Google defends its commissions as a way to be compensated for all money that it invests into its Play Store and asserts that the controls over it are a way to protect the security of the tens of millions of people in the US who download apps for phones powered by Android.

Google initially was going to have to defend itself against multiple foes in the trial, but in September it settled allegations that had been brought against the Play Store by state attorneys general and just last week resolved a case being pursued by Match Group.

The Match settlement prompted Google to switch from its original request for a jury trial to a proceeding to be decided by the judge, but Donato rebuffed the bid.

Match is receiving $40 million and adopting Google's “user choice billing" system in its settlement. The terms of the resolution with the state attorneys general is expected to be revealed during Google's trial with Epic.

Epic CEO Tim Sweeney skewered the “user choice billing” option as a sham in a social media post vowing to fight Google in court. Sweeney also is expected to take the witness stand during the trial.

Wilson White, Google's vice president of government affairs and public policy, accused Epic of trying to get “something for nothing” in a blog post. After pointing out that Epic already lost the crux of its case against Apple, White blasted the game maker for “trying their luck with Android by bringing a case that has even less merit.”



US Judge Finds Israel's NSO Group Liable for Hacking in WhatsApp Lawsuit

Israeli cyber firm NSO Group's exhibition stand is seen at "ISDEF 2019", an international defense and homeland security expo, in Tel Aviv, Israel June 4, 2019. REUTERS/Keren Manor/File Photo
Israeli cyber firm NSO Group's exhibition stand is seen at "ISDEF 2019", an international defense and homeland security expo, in Tel Aviv, Israel June 4, 2019. REUTERS/Keren Manor/File Photo
TT

US Judge Finds Israel's NSO Group Liable for Hacking in WhatsApp Lawsuit

Israeli cyber firm NSO Group's exhibition stand is seen at "ISDEF 2019", an international defense and homeland security expo, in Tel Aviv, Israel June 4, 2019. REUTERS/Keren Manor/File Photo
Israeli cyber firm NSO Group's exhibition stand is seen at "ISDEF 2019", an international defense and homeland security expo, in Tel Aviv, Israel June 4, 2019. REUTERS/Keren Manor/File Photo

A US judge ruled on Friday in favor of Meta Platforms' WhatsApp in a lawsuit accusing Israel's NSO Group of exploiting a bug in the messaging app to install spy software allowing unauthorized surveillance.

US District Judge Phyllis Hamilton in Oakland, California, granted a motion by WhatsApp and found NSO liable for hacking and breach of contract.

The case will now proceed to a trial only on the issue of damages, Hamilton said. NSO Group did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment, according to Reuters.

Will Cathcart, the head of WhatsApp, said the ruling is a win for privacy.

"We spent five years presenting our case because we firmly believe that spyware companies could not hide behind immunity or avoid accountability for their unlawful actions," Cathcart said in a social media post.

"Surveillance companies should be on notice that illegal spying will not be tolerated."

Cybersecurity experts welcomed the judgment.

John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher with Canadian internet watchdog Citizen Lab — which first brought to light NSO’s Pegasus spyware in 2016 — called the judgment a landmark ruling with “huge implications for the spyware industry.”

“The entire industry has hidden behind the claim that whatever their customers do with their hacking tools, it's not their responsibility,” he said in an instant message. “Today's ruling makes it clear that NSO Group is in fact responsible for breaking numerous laws.”

WhatsApp in 2019 sued NSO seeking an injunction and damages, accusing it of accessing WhatsApp servers without permission six months earlier to install the Pegasus software on victims' mobile devices. The lawsuit alleged the intrusion allowed the surveillance of 1,400 people, including journalists, human rights activists and dissidents.

NSO had argued that Pegasus helps law enforcement and intelligence agencies fight crime and protect national security and that its technology is intended to help catch terrorists, pedophiles and hardened criminals.

NSO appealed a trial judge's 2020 refusal to award it "conduct-based immunity," a common law doctrine protecting foreign officials acting in their official capacity.

Upholding that ruling in 2021, the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals called it an "easy case" because NSO's mere licensing of Pegasus and offering technical support did not shield it from liability under a federal law called the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which took precedence over common law.

The US Supreme Court last year turned away NSO's appeal of the lower court's decision, allowing the lawsuit to proceed.