Mishaal Rahman / Android Authority
Yesterday, Google and Epic finally reached an agreement to settle their years-long legal dispute. If approved by the judge overseeing the case, the settlement would resolve the lawsuit Epic filed in 2020 to challenge Google’s stranglehold on Android app distribution. As part of the agreement, Google plans to make sweeping changes to Android, which will be implemented in a future version of next year’s Android 17 release. The company is developing a new system that will allow users to easily install third-party app stores, reducing the friction of getting apps from outside of Google Play.
This timing is notable, as next year is also when Android’s new developer verification requirements will go into effect. Beginning in September 2026, Android will block users from installing apps made by unverified developers. Although Google says that sideloading isn’t going anywhere, some critics are concerned this change will kill alternative app stores like F-Droid. That’s why Google’s agreement with Epic has sparked hope that Android’s sideloading restrictions will be eased or eliminated entirely next year.
If you were hoping for that, then I’m sorry to disappoint you, because Google’s proposed changes to Android won’t save sideloading as we know it. They will, however, make the Android app ecosystem more competitive, benefitting users by reducing prices and improving app availability. Here’s how.
Placing third-party app stores on equal footing with the Google Play Store
The biggest change coming to the Android OS is support for “Registered App Stores.” A “Registered App Store” is a third-party app store that Google has certified. The certification process hasn’t been defined yet, but the settlement terms state that Google may create “reasonable requirements” for certification, such as a review of the app store and the payment of a “reasonable” fee that covers operational costs. This fee may not be “revenue proportionate,” meaning it cannot be based on how much revenue the app store generates.
Once an app store is certified, users can install it with a single click from its website. This will initiate a “single store install screen” that uses “neutral language” rather than the current warnings that Epic argues deter users from proceeding.
Mishaal Rahman / Android Authority
A photo showing one of the many current dialogs that users have to click through to install the Epic Games Store on Android.
Importantly, this install screen will also “grant the permission to the store to install apps.” It’s unclear whether this refers to the INSTALL_PACKAGES permission, which allows stores to install apps without user intervention, or REQUEST_INSTALL_PACKAGES, which requires the user’s consent for each installation. Currently, only preinstalled app stores like the Google Play Store can have the more powerful INSTALL_PACKAGES permission. Third-party app stores have to request the latter, which adds extra steps for the user.
For years, Epic has argued that Android makes it onerous and scary to install and use third-party app stores. Compared to the seamless experience within the Google Play Store, installing an app from an alternative source involves far more friction. Users must navigate a multi-step process filled with prompts that use discouraging language. Google has long argued this flow is necessary to protect users, and while there’s certainly truth to that, it also weakens any third-party attempt at dethroning the Play Store.
A screenshot gallery showing some of the key steps that need to be taken currently to install the Epic Games Store and then install a game from the store.
By cutting down this multi-step process, third-party app stores could see greater adoption. If more users flock to these alternative stores, then more developers will follow, and vice versa. Eventually, some third-party Android app stores may even become competitive with Google Play.
While Google certainly doesn’t want to put third-party app stores on a more level playing field with its own, it doesn’t have much choice. Epic won its lawsuit against Google and was originally seeking to force the company to allow third-party stores on the Play Store and to open up its app catalog. Now, both parties have settled on a different approach that will be implemented worldwide.
To support these “Registered App Stores,” Google must make core changes to the operating system. These changes will be released “in a version of the next major Android release” — in other words, Android 17. Since this will likely require changes to the Android SDK, we probably won’t see the feature roll out until Android 17 QPR2 in December 2026, assuming Google sticks to its current release schedule. Google is committing to supporting this feature through June 30, 2032, giving third-party app stores roughly six years to build themselves up and take on the Play Store.
Mishaal Rahman / Android Authority
Simply making it easier to install and use third-party app stores isn’t enough to put them on a level playing field with the Play Store, though. That’s why Google is committing to several other changes that limit its ability to discourage OEMs or developers from working with third-party app stores.
For starters, Google can no longer prevent OEMs or carriers from preinstalling third-party app stores or placing them on the home screen. Previously, OEMs and carriers would sign agreements that restricted these actions in exchange for payments, revenue-sharing deals, or special access to Google products and services. Google is now agreeing to refrain from making such deals for three years from the date the agreement goes into effect.
In addition, Google is agreeing to stop sharing Play Store revenue with any entity that distributes Android apps or that has stated its intention to launch a competing platform. This ensures Google cannot pay off existing or potential competitors to keep them from competing with the Play Store. For example, Google allegedly considered sharing revenue with Samsung to discourage it from building up the Galaxy Store, an action this agreement now explicitly prohibits for at least three years.
Lastly, Google agrees that it will “permit third-party app stores to operate on Android free of charge” through June 30, 2032. This means that direct downloads from developer websites and third-party stores will continue without any fees. The only exception is if a download originates from a link within an app (excluding web browsers) that was installed or updated from the Google Play Store. Basically, Google is agreeing not to impose additional financial burdens on third-party app stores or on apps downloaded from them. Note that this likely doesn’t prohibit Android’s developer verification requirements, as those don’t directly impose fees on app downloads themselves.
AssembleDebug / Android Authority
While these changes will put third-party Android app stores on a more level playing field with the Google Play Store, they don’t resolve all of Epic’s complaints. Epic also successfully argued that Google’s Play Store policies were far too restrictive and anticompetitive, so Google is also proposing several changes to its rules for alternative billing and developer-user communication.
Developers now have more freedom to choose which app store they want to launch on
Instead of forcing all apps on the Google Play Store to use Google Play Billing for in-app digital transactions, Google will soon allow developers to use alternative payment options. These can include external web links or alternative in-app payment systems. If a developer chooses to show an alternative option, it must be displayed side-by-side with Google Play Billing, though they are free to highlight different pricing or other benefits.
The payment screen that got Fortnite kicked off the Play Store back in 2020.
This is a major change, as Google previously required most developers to exclusively use its Play Billing system for many in-app purchases. Google charges a service fee of 15% on the first $1 million of a developer’s revenue and 30% on all earnings after that. This results in a significant chunk of many companies’ revenue going to Google, a fee many have argued is excessive. By allowing developers to offer alternative options, they can potentially keep more of their revenue and pass savings on to users with lower prices.
However, Google can still take a service fee on transactions completed with alternative payment methods. For in-app and linked purchases in games, Google can charge a fee of up to 20% for purchases that “impact game outcomes, gameplay progress rate, or player power,” as well as for purchases with “random outcomes” (i.e., loot boxes).
Google can also charge an up to 20% fee for any transaction that occurs on external websites after a user clicks a link in an app. To track these transactions, Google will provide an API to receive payment and accounting information. The company agrees not to use this API for any other purpose and can only claim a service fee for transactions completed within 24 hours of the user clicking an in-app link.
For other categories, Google can charge a service fee of up to 9%. This includes:
- Purchases of “content, levels, events, or cosmetic items.”
- In-app subscriptions for apps.
- In-app and linked purchases in non-game apps.
This 9% fee also applies to the upfront cost of paid apps on the Play Store.
Nick Fernandez / Android Authority
While the exact fees haven’t been finalized, Google says this new service fee structure will start no later than March 31, 2026, and will last through June 30, 2032. Interestingly, there might be a brief period where these fees don’t apply, as developers can begin showing alternative payment methods as early as December 3, 2025.
To ensure developers can freely use this feature, Google is also making several other commitments. The company will not:
- Prohibit developers from communicating with users about alternative payment methods.
- Force developers to set prices based on which billing system is used.
- Discriminate against them for using an alternative payment method.
- Impose unreasonable restrictions on the design, placement, or messaging of alternative payment options, except for the requirement that they appear side-by-side with the Google Play Billing button.
Finally, for a period of three years, the agreement prevents Google from paying developers to favor the Play Store over competing app stores in the United States. Specifically, Google cannot offer payments or other incentives to a developer for launching an app first or exclusively on the Google Play Store if it delays the app’s launch on a competing store in the U.S. Google is also forbidden from paying developers to prevent them from releasing different versions of their apps with exclusive features on third-party stores in the U.S.
However, Google can still offer incentives for developers to launch on the Android platform first or exclusively. When making these “Android-first” deals, Google must allow the developer to freely choose which Android app store they use for distribution within the United States. This prevents Google from creating an “Android-first” deal that is secretly a “Play Store-first” deal for the U.S. market.
Overall, Google’s proposed changes will go a long way toward making third-party Android app stores more competitive. The changes especially benefit Epic, which has long sought to establish its Games Store as a major platform for Android games. The friction in installing the Epic Games Store will be significantly reduced, and Epic will be free to strike agreements with OEMs to preload its store. The company will also have more leeway to make exclusive deals with developers, a practice it has used successfully on PC.
For developers not looking to create their own stores, the immediate benefits are more modest. While they can soon offer alternative payment options, Google will still collect a service fee, limiting the potential savings. The real long-term advantage is the potential for a more competitive marketplace. If these changes allow third-party stores to gain significant traction, developers will have more platforms to choose from, which could lead to more favorable terms for everyone.
Ultimately, this is a foundational shift for the Android ecosystem. While it won’t save sideloading as we know it, it promises more choice for users. In the long run, this increased competition could lead to a wider variety of apps, exclusive content on different stores, and potentially lower prices for in-app purchases. It’s not an overnight revolution, but a major step toward a more open app market.
Thank you for being part of our community. Read our Comment Policy before posting.
