Europe's Competition Commission charges Android with violating EU competition laws

[Shane R]

Margrethe Vestager, the EU competition chief, said the European commission had taken the preliminary view that Google had abused its dominant position, following an initial one-year investigation.

“What we found is that Google pursues an overall strategy on mobile devices to protect and expand its dominant position in internet search,” Vestager said.

“The commission is concerned that Google’s behaviour has harmed consumers by restricting competition and innovation,” she added. “Rival search engines and mobile operating systems have not been able to compete on their merits. This is not good.”

The EU case against Android is centred on the concern that tablet and smartphone makers, as well as network operators, are not free to choose which search engines and browsers to install on their devices because of Google’s “unjustified restrictions and conditions”.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...trust-vestager

Prediction...this gets dragged out and finally results in a milquetoast resolution that changes...nothing.

[fjtorres]

Well, not exactly nothing...
Google will be fined a couple billion Euros and that money is sorely needed to prop up the EU...

And there will be a version of Android (Android N?) that, just like Windows N, doesn't have the offending apps bundled in so consumers can choose between the two versions and totally ignore the scrubbed version.

"Plus ça change, plus la memê."

[oblox]

It does make you wonder why Apple doesnt get investigated for similar, they come bundled with all their own apps which in the past used to have advantages over other browsers (Safari javascript engine).

They don't allow any service providers to add bundled software to their OS images or alternative apps or even App stores which Google do allow. Should they get less scrutiny just because they only produce their own phones for themselves whereas Googles OS is open source but they try and funnel people into their own ecosystem?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Well, not exactly nothing...
Google will be fined a couple billion Euros and that money is sorely needed to prop up the EU...

And there will be a version of Android (Android N?) that, just like Windows N, doesn't have the offending apps bundled in so consumers can choose between the two versions and totally ignore the scrubbed version.

"Plus ça change, plus la memê."

Even if found guilty, a fine would only almost certainly only result if Google refused to comply with a ruling that users should be given a choice of search engine. There's no precedent for a fine to be issued in such cases, unless the company refuses to go along with whatever the legal ruling is.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Even if found guilty, a fine would only almost certainly only result if Google refused to comply with a ruling that users should be given a choice of search engine. There's no precedent for a fine to be issued in such cases, unless the company refuses to go along with whatever the legal ruling is.

Microsoft gave them the version of Windows without media player they (and the Fraunhofer Institute) wanted. And they still fined them a half billion as a part of the settlement.

They'll get their pot of gold one way or another, just you watch.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Microsoft gave them the version of Windows without media player they (and the Fraunhofer Institute) wanted. And they still fined them a half billion as a part of the settlement.

You're right - I was thinking of the "Browser Choice" case, where there was no fine (until Microsoft broke the agreement). Why, though, do you think that Google would be fined 4x more than Microsoft? A search engine choice would seem to have more in common with web browser choice, where there was no fine involved, just a requirement that users be given a choice of browser.

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by oblox

It does make you wonder why Apple doesnt get investigated for similar, they come bundled with all their own apps which in the past used to have advantages over other browsers (Safari javascript engine).

They don't allow any service providers to add bundled software to their OS images or alternative apps or even App stores which Google do allow. Should they get less scrutiny just because they only produce their own phones for themselves whereas Googles OS is open source but they try and funnel people into their own ecosystem?

I think that Apple is (or has been) under investigation in the EU for something as well. American business analysts have noted that all of the giants, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Google, have faced a hostile EU.

But...Google is attempting to influence profit in one of its businesses through the use of another of its businesses in a way that precludes other entrants from competing with them. They actively withhold the Play Store (as an example) from Amazon and others if certain conditions aren't met. I'm not sure if Apple has a similar corollary to that.

[Alpha o]

There are some things that do not get a choice. I have Marshmallow 6.0 on an unlocked device, and while you can disable most of Google, you have to keep your contacts in a Google account or your phonebook doesn't work correctly. There are one or two independent dialers in Google Play Store, but if you try to download, you are denied. I have a klutzy workaround that is a total pain. This is more personal info than some browsers give.

Even XDA had an article about removing Google from a phone - everything except contacts which so far, no one has managed to do an alternate app.

http://www.xda-developers.com/settin...ithout-google/

If that's the main part of the EU suit - ---

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Alpha o

There are some things that do not get a choice. I have Marshmallow 6.0 on an unlocked device, and while you can disable most of Google, you have to keep your contacts in a Google account or your phonebook doesn't work correctly. There are one or two independent dialers in Google Play Store, but if you try to download, you are denied. I have a klutzy workaround that is a total pain. This is more personal info than some browsers give.

Even XDA had an article about removing Google from a phone - everything except contacts which so far, no one has managed to do an alternate app.

http://www.xda-developers.com/settin...ithout-google/

If that's the main part of the EU suit - ---

It appears to be primarily about the fact that Google search engine is a significant source of revenue for Google, so when people buy an Android phone or tablet, they're generating additional revenue for Google by forcing Google search onto them.

(Apple's iOS devices do let you change the search engine.)

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You're right - I was thinking of the "Browser Choice" case, where there was no fine (until Microsoft broke the agreement). Why, though, do you think that Google would be fined 4x more than Microsoft? A search engine choice would seem to have more in common with web browser choice, where there was no fine involved, just a requirement that users be given a choice of browser.

Because they have much deeper pockets and the EU economy ain't what it used to be. And, the actual size of the fine can go to $7B so shaking them down for only two would be a bargain.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It appears to be primarily about the fact that Google search engine is a significant source of revenue for Google, so when people buy an Android phone or tablet, they're generating additional revenue for Google by forcing Google search onto them.

(Apple's iOS devices do let you change the search engine.)

In that case, I am totally confused.
I have an Android tablet. I am using Google Chrome, though I do have another browser choice.
As to the search engine, I just pulled up both yahoo and bing on Google chrome.
Oh and on my Android phone, I had to set my search engine.

So because people don't know or realize they have choices, Google is being forced on them?

[Alpha o]

Others may not have the choice. I had a Chinese phone that happened to be usable in the US. The forum for that phone was polyglot and a great mishmash of all cultures. It was fun just to read it. Some posts were anti-Google. Google had a problem with China as it didn't want to censor searches.

MS is also under investigation for anti-trust.

Now if the EU wants searches censored and Google wants the bucks, I'd still put my money on the EU.

[Alpha o]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

In that case, I am totally confused.
I have an Android tablet. I am using Google Chrome, though I do have another browser choice.
As to the search engine, I just pulled up both yahoo and bing on Google chrome.
Oh and on my Android phone, I had to set my search engine.

So because people don't know or realize they have choices, Google is being forced on them?

That might not be allowed elsewhere. Even people here don't know they can't disable half of Google and use their own apps. Google is forcing contacts in Marshmallow on all. Everything else can be disabled, and XDA has a list. I tend to read a lot of the fora.

I have friends that absolutely hate Google. They won't use Gmail, Chrome, etc. and I'm supposed to supply their phone numbers for Google to scan for in contacts?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

In that case, I am totally confused.
I have an Android tablet. I am using Google Chrome, though I do have another browser choice.
As to the search engine, I just pulled up both yahoo and bing on Google chrome.
Oh and on my Android phone, I had to set my search engine.

So because people don't know or realize they have choices, Google is being forced on them?

Here is a good summary of the claims:

http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-...tag=TRE17cfd61

Just remember that EU antitrust isn't about consumer harm but about protecting "competition", for arbitrary values of competition.

So, for example, collusion to fix ebook prices only merits a warning but including a media player in an OS since before media players became important merits serious prosecution and a big fine.

Also, it matters if the company targeted is european.
(Off the top of my head I can't recall a single european tech company getting targeted.)

The key word in Euro antitrust turns out to be "arbitrary".

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Also, it matters if the company targeted is european.
(Off the top of my head I can't recall a single european tech company getting targeted.)

Your views are somewhat blinkered; the European Commission takes action against many European tech companies whose activities are deemed not to be in the interests of the consumer. One entire industry whose activities have been massively affected by such rulings are European mobile phone operators, with the Commission forcing a dramatic reduction in international roaming charges within the EU for both voice and data.