A federal judge has raised fresh concerns over whether a newly revealed business partnership between Epic Games and Google may have influenced the companies’ decision to settle their long-running antitrust dispute.
During a court hearing in San Francisco on Friday, US District Judge James Donato revealed that Epic and Google have quietly entered into a new commercial agreement involving joint product development, marketing efforts, and partnerships. The revelation came as the court reviewed the proposed settlement that would reshape how Google operates its Android app ecosystem.
The timing of the deal immediately raised eyebrows.
A Deal That Wasn’t Public, Until Now
According to Judge Donato, the agreement includes elements that would see Epic help market Android, while Google would make use of Epic’s core technology, including Unreal Engine. He questioned whether this behind-the-scenes collaboration could have softened Epic’s stance in negotiations that affect the broader app developer community.
“You’re going to be helping Google market Android, and they’re going to be helping you market Fortnite,” Donato said during the hearing, pressing witnesses on whether the arrangement existed before settlement talks.
Epic CEO Tim Sweeney confirmed the deal is real, though still under development, and acknowledged that it relates to Epic’s long-term vision around the metaverse, a term Epic often uses to describe Fortnite’s evolving platform.
$800 Million and a Lot of Questions
One of the most striking disclosures was financial. Judge Donato revealed that Epic is expected to spend roughly $800 million over six years purchasing services from Google.
Sweeney did not deny the figure, explaining that Epic had historically avoided doing business with Google but had now decided to move forward “at market rates.” He emphasized that the arrangement does not involve co-developing a single product, but rather parallel development efforts where both companies benefit.
Still, the judge appeared uneasy, questioning whether the deal amounted to a quid pro quo that reduced Epic’s incentive to push for stronger remedies in the Android ecosystem.
Concerns Over Fair Competition
At the heart of the issue is whether Epic’s settlement push truly serves the wider developer community or primarily benefits Epic itself.
Epic is currently backing a settlement that would require Google to lower its app store fees and make it easier for alternative app stores to operate on Android devices. Judge Donato questioned whether Epic’s new business relationship with Google could undercut the company’s long-standing public stance on fair competition.
Sweeney pushed back on that idea.
“I don’t see anything crooked about Epic paying Google off to encourage much more robust competition than they’ve allowed in the past,” he said, adding that Epic would not receive special treatment on Android under the agreement.
Settlement and Strategy, Tightly Linked
The court made it clear that the settlement and the business deal appear connected. Judge Donato suggested the agreement may only proceed if the settlement is approved a point Sweeney did not dispute.
He also acknowledged that the deal is an important part of Epic’s future growth strategy, even while reiterating Epic’s public commitment to equal treatment for all developers.
Google declined to comment on the matter, while Epic did not immediately respond to follow-up questions.
For now, the court is left weighing whether this partnership represents healthy collaboration or a behind-the-scenes compromise that could reshape the outcome of one of tech’s most closely watched antitrust battles.
