India Widens Antitrust Probe Into Google's Android Dominance

An anonymous reader quotes Reuters: Google appears to have misused its dominant position in India and reduced the ability of device manufacturers to opt for alternate versions of its Android mobile operating system, Indian officials found before ordering a wider probe in an antitrust case. A 14-page order from the Competition Commission of India (CCI), reviewed by Reuters this week, found Google's restrictions on manufacturers seemed to amount to imposition of "unfair conditions" under India's competition law....

The Indian case is similar to one Google faced in Europe, where regulators imposed a $5 billion fine on the company for forcing manufacturers to pre-install its apps on Android devices. Google has appealed against the verdict.

By making pre-installation of Google's proprietary apps conditional, Google "reduced the ability and incentive of device manufacturers to develop and sell devices operated on alternate versions of Android", the CCI said in the order. "It amounts to prima facie leveraging of Google's dominance".

Re:

[unixisc]

Are you really that stupid that you think that Indians who work at Microsoft or Google are of the same caliber as those back in Bangalore or Pune? Most of the people you describe are those who have studied or worked in the US from the time they were students.

Microsoft was actually great during the Gates era - when Bill was CEO. That was when Windows was actually good, and Office was great. SharePoint was usable, or at least did what it was stated to do. Once Ballmer and then Nadella came in, it all we

Re:

[jonwil]

There are plenty of alternative phone operating systems out there that phone vendors can pick from (some of which are forks of the Android AOSP code, others which are based on a full Linux stack with X and stuff and still others are something different again).

However, none of those OSs have all the apps people want and need (the only alternative app store to gain any real traction is Amazon and even that has nowhere near as many apps as the Google Play Store) which means that if you want all the apps you ha

Re: $5B is nothing

[Cmdln Daco]

Google has the app developers all signed up in their app store.

To reiterate Ballmer's message:

"Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers!"

Re:

[Tough Love]

They gave Apple $31B just for the search engine to be available on iPhone.

The difference is, they made money from Apple. You can bet the $5 billion EU fine stung seriously. BTW, EU law allows antitrust fines up to 10% of global revenue, just in case Google decides to get flip about the last one.

Re:

[johnsie]

And there's others who think "America" means USA.

Any study done? What do users want?

[Tomahawk]

Has any study or research been done by any of these companies to see if there is actual demand or want for an Android device that doesn't come with Google's apps?

I know there are a few on the market, Amazon's Fire tablets being a prime example. I bought one of these as a gift for someone some time back, and ended up buying a more expensive Samsung tablet 6 months later because the Google apps couldn't be installed on the Fire.

My own personal expectation is that the Google Apps come with Android -- they are part of Android, imo. And if I found that a device I was considering buying didn't have these installed, then I wouldn't purchase the device.

So while Google are "forcing" manufacturers to install these (and that typically means "If you want to access the Google-owned-and-run Play Store, then these apps must be installed as a part the licence"), I think the vast majority of users _want_ to have these apps installed.

Is that "antitrust" ?! Manufacturers can still just use a different Android marketplace if they don't want to go with Google. But, then again, most users will want access to Google's Play Store, as well as the Google apps.

Re:

[Freischutz]

Has any study or research been done by any of these companies to see if there is actual demand or want for an Android device that doesn't come with Google's apps?

I know there are a few on the market, Amazon's Fire tablets being a prime example. I bought one of these as a gift for someone some time back, and ended up buying a more expensive Samsung tablet 6 months later because the Google apps couldn't be installed on the Fire.

My own personal expectation is that the Google Apps come with Android -- they are part of Android, imo. And if I found that a device I was considering buying didn't have these installed, then I wouldn't purchase the device.

So while Google are "forcing" manufacturers to install these (and that typically means "If you want to access the Google-owned-and-run Play Store, then these apps must be installed as a part the licence"), I think the vast majority of users _want_ to have these apps installed.

Is that "antitrust" ?! Manufacturers can still just use a different Android marketplace if they don't want to go with Google. But, then again, most users will want access to Google's Play Store, as well as the Google apps.

I think the key question is: Why did people around here get their panties in a twist when Microsoft abused their monopoly in this way but make excuses when Google does the same thing?

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, why aren't apple being dragged over the coals for the same thing?

Re: Any study done? What do users want?

[Cmdln Daco]

Apple doesn't have an operating system that other manufacturers install on their hardware. Apple doesn't use that to leverage other conditions out of competitors.

For better or for worse, Apple is happy capturing a high paying minority share of the mobile market. They're elitist that way and have been since the introduction of the Mac.

Re:

[easyTree]

Fruit requires developers of iPhone apps to use their computer OS to develop for phone.

Nobody asks the users

[Errol backfiring]

No manufacturer ever asks the users what they want. As Mr. Ford once beautifully said "The customer can get any color he wants, as long as it's black." Given how much trouble it has cost to put LineageOS on my phone, I think the vast majority will opt for a phone that is working without any trouble. But I have to say that a phone that is under my control instead of under Google's is well worth the trouble.

Official Android updates contain far more unwanted Google crapware than security fixes, and if users ge

Re:

[alvinrod]

If Mr. Ford hadn't managed to produce the least expensive automobile that consumers could buy, then he would very much need to care about what color the customers wanted. When it comes down to it, if you ask most customers what they want the answer will be "same product only much cheaper" as cost is almost always the top driver for purchase decisions especially when the cost differences are large. Perhaps you get some slightly more savvy customers that will examine things like TCO or average cost over the l

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

If those apps were so essential to the Android experience then Google would not have to mandate that manufacturers install them. They would get installed anyway, no need to risk anti-trust investigations.

In practice a lot of manufacturers, and phone companies, would replace Google apps. Their own crappy search engine, their own email client with ads, their own app store so they can get their 30% cut. Many consumers would be too clueless to avoid it, same as they keep buying phones with an unremovable Facebo

Re:

[Tomahawk]

Well the apps aren't always installable. In the example I gave, the Amazon Fire, none of the Google Apps were available on the Amazon Marketplace. And sideloading them didn't work as various components (Google Play Services, for example) weren't installed and couldn't be installed. Amazon went out of their way to ensure that the Google apps couldn't be used on the Fire.

From a user experience, this is just crap.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

I completely agree, Amazon tablets are crap. But people still buy them. Google apps aren't as essential to most people as some here assume.

Re:

[tlhIngan]

Amazon tablets are crap. But people still buy them. Google apps aren't as essential to most people as some here assume.

Amazon's tablets are crap, and people are only buying them because they can do what people want cheaply.

As in, they're stupidly cheap ($50 delivered next day), and you can watch your Netflix and Amazon Prime video on them. Most games people have heard about on TV or in ads will be there as well, as with a browser.

Google Play isn't, of course, but people aren't looking for Android only app

Huawei?

[Jombieman]

I wonder if they were pressured into it by Huawei? Sort of pushing back because of all the interference from the US government?

Re:

[TechyImmigrant]

I wonder if they were pressured into it by Huawei? Sort of pushing back because of all the interference from the US government?

I got a Huawei tablet in Singapore last week. All the Google stuff is there, play store and all.

Samsung

[dohzer]

Oh god how I wanted to uninstall everything Samsung from my last Samsung Galaxy. The fact I couldn't was why I went for the Pixel.

Re: Samsung

[Cmdln Daco]

So you opted instead for being unable to uninstall Google software from your Google phone.

Re:

[swillden]

So you opted instead for being unable to uninstall Google software from your Google phone.

I think that's exactly what dohzer wanted, though it should be pointed out that Pixel phones have unlockable bootloaders so you can unlock and flash a custom image that doesn't include the Google apps if that's what you want.

Re:

[Tomahawk]

There are other flavours of Android available for use. Some phone manufacturers used CyanogenMod quite successfully, just by way of an example.
The issue at hand here isn't over the use of the OS, which is available open source and they can just use it for free, it's over the use of the Google Play Store, which is proprietary, and over the licencing that Google enforces on manufactures that which to use its proprietary product.
These phone manufacturers could just as easily use the Amazon Marketplace, if the

Re:

[drinkypoo]

In short, no.

Google does NOTHING to prevent competing app stores. You can have one alongside Google play, or you can have one instead of it. You can sideload it if necessary, but normally you can just install it from the web. No antitrust there.

The place Google is abusing its Monopoly position isn't in Android, but in YouTube. They have a commanding lead everywhere but China in video streaming, and they shouldn't be allowed such broad powers of censorship because the combination has a chilling effect on fre

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Did you not read the summary/anything about this?

Nothing in the summary or story contradicts anything I've said, kid. Now run along, and let the adults talk.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Yes, son, I read that. But then the article makes only one supporting claim, which is inadequate: it states that Google required play services to be bundled with Android. But it doesn't claim that they didn't permit manufacturers to distribute other Android-based systems like lineage, so while it might still be true that Google abused their Monopoly position with Android in the way described in the portion you quoted, this article doesn't support that assertion.

Article is shit as usual, welcome to slashdot.

Re:

[unixisc]

If not for the United States of America, hundreds of thousands of Indians won't find great paying job under the H1-B visa program.

If not for the United States of America which outsources software development to India, which is worth tens of billions of dollars every year.

And now India wants to do this to a United States company?

Since India wants to be an ungrateful bitch, we should stop letting them earning any more of our money.

Google is an 'United States' company? Who'd have thunk it, given their aggressive opposition to participating in Project Maven w/ the DoD, while happily working indirectly w/ the Chinese PLA on the same deal (via Chinese Universities)

time to break up companies

[WindBourne]

Seriously, the massively large internet companies really need to be broken up, perhaps vertically, and then allowed to compete. And not just American companies.

Re:

[johnsie]

Yeah, because fragmentation leads to world peace.