[ad_1]
Google challenges India’s Android Market abuse rulingIndian antitrust body wrongly backs Amazon-Google argumentsGoogle claims its conduct on Android Marketplace is not abusiveGoogle previously accused the Indian body of copying parts of the EU order
NEW DELHI, July 6 (Reuters) – Google accused India’s antitrust body of ordering changes to its business model “just to protect” rival Amazon, which has complained it is struggling to develop a modified version of the system Android due to Google’s restrictions, legal newspapers show.
Google has applied to India’s Supreme Court to overturn the Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) October order asking the company to make 10 changes to its business model after the CCI found it had abused its dominant position in the market with its Android operating system, which powers 97% of Indian smartphones.
Google’s latest Supreme Court filing shows its deep disagreement with the way the ICC has conducted its investigation into Android.
In an earlier December filing in a lower court, Google said CCI officials had “copied” parts of a European ruling against the US firm in a similar case. CCI denied the allegation.
In the October order from the CCI, which also fined Google $163 million, the company was asked to allow modified versions of its Android operating system, called Android forks, to be freely distributed without any licensing restrictions. such as those related to pre-installing Google apps.
Amazon told the CCI during its investigation that Google’s restrictions have hampered the development of its Android fork called Fire OS, and Google said the watchdog unfairly relied on that in making its adverse decision against it. the company said in its June 26 Supreme Court filing.
“Globally, FireOS has failed commercially due to poor user experience. In India, the Fire Phone hasn’t even been launched,” Google said in its 1,004-page filing, which hasn’t been made public but has been reviewed by Reuters.
“Thus, the Commission called Amazon’s lack of attempts to compete in India a failure and attributed it to Google’s deals.”
The ICC directive was issued “just to protect Amazon, which has complained that its attempts to create a forked version of Android haven’t worked because of (Google’s) restrictions.”
Google (GOOGL.O) declined to comment, citing ongoing legal proceedings. Amazon (AMZN.O) also declined to comment, while the ICC did not respond to the Alphabet-owned company’s court filing, which is expected to be heard in the coming days.
In 2021, South Korea fined Google $159 million for blocking customized versions of Android.
Google was particularly concerned about India’s Android decision as the directives were seen as even more sweeping than those imposed in the European Commission’s landmark 2018 ruling against the company’s abuse of the Android market.
Google contested both the South Korean and European orders.
In its October ruling, the ICC said its investigators found that Google’s contract restrictions had “reduced the ability and incentive of device makers to develop and sell” devices that run on Android forks, hurting interests of consumers.
Amazon has told Indian investigators that creating Fire OS, like a forked Android, required “substantial resources,” including thousands of man-hours, court documents show.
Google is arguing in India’s Supreme Court against any sanctions and saying it has not abused its market position. The CCI wants Google to comply with all of its directives, the watchdog said in a separate document seen by Reuters.
Google has made sweeping changes to its Android business model in India following CCI’s lead.
A lower court ruled that Google should pay the fine and confirmed it had abused its market position, in line with CCI’s findings, but the US company continues to fight in the Supreme Court.
Reporting by Arpan Chaturvedi and Aditya Kalra; Editing by Kim Coghill
Our standards: the Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Aditya Kalra
|
Sources 2/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-accuses-india-antitrust-body-protecting-amazon-android-probe-2023-07-06/ The mention sources can contact us to remove/changing this article |
[ad_2]