Google is facing a class action lawsuit over its alleged App Store price fix

[ad_1]

TL; DR: A massive class action lawsuit against Google is about to go to trial. The lawsuit alleges that Google misled Play customers by warning them not to use alternative app stores. The case is scheduled to be held next summer.

Initially, 12 US states and five territories launched antitrust suits, including Alabama, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Wyoming, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands and Puerto Rico. and the US Virgin Islands.

In 2021, prosecutors in those areas claimed that the search giant used monopoly power and fear to convince customers to buy apps through Google Play at “artificially inflated” prices when they could have gotten the same apps at a lower price through other sites. The claims amount to price fixing, which is when a firm “maintains market conditions such that the price is maintained at a certain level by controlling supply and demand.”

These suggestions prompted legal teams from several clients with similar pending individual lawsuits to meet with the AGs and petition for class action status.

Google has issued a motion to deny the class action designation because not every plaintiff in individual lawsuits can necessarily prove harm. The company’s legal team argued that this would open the door for non-injured plaintiffs to join the class. However, the plaintiffs countered that they wanted the classification because Google’s actions had caused all of the developers to “inflate” their prices.

On Monday, US District Judge James Donato Rule That the non-injured parties who joined the class action had no consequence as to whether or not the action was so classified.

“In fact, Google requires each member of the class to individually prove infection before certification is granted,” said Donato. “The law says otherwise. It is true that a classroom may not be approved when it is so extensive that a large number of uninfected people fill it. Google has not shown that this is a concern here.”

Of course, Google wasn’t happy with Donato’s decision. A Reuters spokesman told Reuters that the legal team will be Taking into account the its options.

Much of the legal controversy has been boiled down to the opinions of “legal experts” regarding App Store pricing models. Plaintiff witness Hal Singer alleged that discouraging Google customers from using alternative stores caused app makers to raise prices in Google Play “across the board” to make up for Google’s cut. He concluded that app developers would lower prices if Google lowered its commission.

Google expert Michelle Bertis responded, saying that Singer used methodologies to calculate “traffic rates” that were not “standard” and that she had “never seen it before”. It also noted that Singer failed to provide factual data to support how Google’s fees affect developers’ decisions about pricing. And she asked the court to expunge Singer’s testimony on this basis.

Judge Donato said no.

“The court is a gatekeeper, not a finder of facts,” Donato wrote. “The court will exclude unwanted science that does not meet the federal rule of evidence 702 reliability standards by making a preliminary determination that expert testimony is reliable.” Any objections less than that are incentives for questioning, not exclusion.”

In other words, the credibility and methodology of Singer’s testimony, or lack thereof, should be compartmentalized in court when cross-examining witnesses. Donato can only disqualify a testimonial if it is proven to be false. He added that just because a Google viewer had not seen Singer’s methodology used before does not render it invalid.

“[It] It is not necessarily “surprising” that expert opinions are based on new methods and are not the subject of peer review, the judge said.

Barring any delay, the case’s first hearing is scheduled for June 2023. If it’s the best in court, Google could face up to $4.7 billion in damages.

[ad_2]

Source link

Related Posts

Precaliga