Credit: Screenshot YouTube Android N succeed Android Marshmallow, the sixth version of mobile software Google
Brussels returned to the charge against Google. Already on the offensive against the search engine’s practices in the comparison of online product prices, the European Commission opened Wednesday, April 20 a new front against the American giant, this time in his sights the application ecosystem Android team that over 80% of smartphones across the planet . The Commission believes that Google violated the competition rules of the European Union using its operating system to consolidate its dominant position in the online search market.
“We believe that by its behavior, Google deprives consumers of a wider choice of mobile applications and services and that the company stifles innovation from other actors, in violation of EU competition rules, “said the Commissioner of competition policy, Margrethe Vestager during a press conference in Brussels. The Commission has sent Google a “statement of objections” – sort of indictment in Brussels jargon – about the operating system and Android applications, after an investigation in April 2015.
the Commission claims that Google violated EU competition rules:
– making the grant of licenses for some of its proprietary applications with the obligation, for manufacturers to pre-install Google search and Chrome browser from Google and to Google search the default search service on their devices;
– prevent manufacturers from selling smart mobile devices running the competing operating systems based on the “open source” code of Android;
– providing financial incentives to manufacturers and mobile operators provided they preinstall exclusively on their Google Search devices
1. – Use Google Play to promote Google Search and Chrome
The first complaint expressed by Brussels regarding the store of Google applications. The Commission considers that the Redmond company uses it as a growth driver for two of its tools , the search engine Google Search and Google Chrome web browser. Google offers free Android available to smartphone makers but their request to install the search engine and search the default Chrome browser if they want access to the Play Store application store.
“In Consequently, it is impossible for the rival search engines to become the default search service on the vast majority of equipment sold in the European economic Area, “the Commission writes. “By its strategy, Google also deterred manufacturers to pre-install competing research applications and consumers to download these applications.
The same process is pinned to the Chrome browser , which Google calls “pre-installation in exchange for the grant under license Google Play Store or Google Search” to “ensure that it is also pre-installed on the vast majority of devices sold in the EEA.” with the same consequences for competitors to Chrome. “the fact deter manufacturers to pre-install competing navigation applications and consumers to download these applications has harmed competition in the markets for mobile browsers and general search,” wrote the Commission
2. – Hinder alternative versions of Android
the second point is the agreement “d ‘antifragramentation “that manufacturers are obliged to sign to commit to not to sell smartphones operating under alternative versions of Android . Android is indeed an “open source” software. This means it can be freely used and developed by anyone wanting to create a mobile operating system modified from Android core. This is what we then called “Android fork”.
The Commission accuses Google to require manufacturers to install no fork default on their smartphones if they are to enjoy Google tools like store Play store applications, the search engine Google search or Google Chrome browser.
Brussels believes that this practice prevented the Europeans’ access to innovative smart mobile devices based on other versions, potentially superior, Android OS “. The Commission shall dispose “of evidence that Google has prevented manufacturers from selling smart mobile devices running an Android fork competitor likely to become a credible alternative” to Android.
3 – Provide significant financial incentives
The third complaint relates sealed exclusivity agreements between Google and major manufacturers . The Commission criticizes Google for agreeing to “significant financial incentives to some of the largest manufacturers of smart phones and tablets as well as mobile network operators, provided they pre-install Google Search exclusively on their devices “.
Brussels believes again that these practices have hampered the principle of free competition in the European Union strengthening the dominant position of Google search to search online .
“Google has deterred manufacturers and mobile network operators to pre-install competing search services on devices they sell. The Commission has indeed evidence that the exclusivity clause had an impact on the preinstallation or not competing search services by some manufacturers of devices and some mobile network operators, “writes the Commission.
What Google responding?
Google rejected accusations from the Commission, arguing that “Android has helped promote a remarkable and sustainable ecosystem, open to innovation” and allowed developers to offer a wide range of applications to the public. “We look forward to working with the European Commission in order to prove that Android is good for competition and for consumers,” said Kent Walker, Google lawyer, in a brief statement.
Google recalls in passing that signed contracts with manufacturers of smartphones are based on the “voluntary” and can pre-install applications of their choice to the default interface, including those of competing groups and services like Facebook, Microsoft or Amazon.
as a result of this “statement of objections”, Google can now build his defense to avoid possible sanctions from Brussels : a fine of up to 10% of the annual turnover of the group is $ 7.4 billion (based on figures for 2015). Under EU rules, the Mountain View group now twelve weeks to respond.
Why Apple or Samsung are not covered?
Among the complainants, the organization FairSearch -which includes several companies and organizations, such as Trip Advisor or Nokia– has” applauded “the offensive of the European Commission. “This is a decisive step to end abusive practices surrounding Android”, welcomed Thomas Vinje, spokesman for FairSearch, in a statement. The Russian portal and search engine, Yandex, the most used by Russian speakers and also part of the complainants, was also pleased.
Conversely, the Computer and Communications Industry Association , a powerful lobby that defends the interests of the digital giants including Amazon, Facebook and Google, was “curious” the charges of the European Commission show Numerama . The association reports that Samsung sells, for example, Android phones and other sub Tizen OS, another open source software based on Linux. Numerama notes, however, that nothing prevents the Korean giant, which did not launch any device on Tizen in Europe and the US to negotiate a separate agreement with Google.
in turn Le Figaro why Apple recalls, which also offers its own applications on its devices with its iOS operating system, is not worried by the Commission. The Apple brand is less than 20% of smartphone sales in Europe while Brussels believes that Google occupies “a dominant position on services markets general search on the internet , smart mobile operating systems subject to license applications and online shops for the mobile operating system Android. “
Europe does not let Google
This is the second “indictment” in a year that Ms. Vestager sends Google. In April 2015, the European Commission sent a “statement of objections” to the American giant for abusing its dominant position in the internet search. The Danish commissioner considered Google favored or had an advantage in its result pages, its own price comparison service “Google Shopping” and its predecessor, “Product Search”, relative to comparison services competitors prices.
The American giant was attacked late August against-judging “false” accusations of European competition watchdog. The Commission has not yet rendered a decision , which could again result in a fine of 10% of turnover. In May 2009, after nine years of investigation, the US giant Intel computer chips was fined 1.06 billion euros for hindering competition, the largest fine ever imposed by Brussels to a company.
No comments:
Post a Comment