Google accuses India antitrust body of protecting Amazon in Android
probe
Send a link to a friend
[July 06, 2023] By
Arpan Chaturvedi and Aditya Kalra
NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Google has accused India's antitrust body of
ordering changes to its business model "only to protect" rival Amazon,
which complained about its struggles to develop a modified version of
the Android system due to Google's restrictions, legal papers show.
Google has approached India's Supreme Court to quash 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 abused its dominant
position in the market with its Android operating system, which powers
97% of India's smartphones.
Google's latest Supreme Court filing shows its deepening disagreement
with how the CCI conducted its Android investigation.
In an earlier December filing in a lower tribunal, Google said CCI
officers had "copypasted" parts of a European ruling against the U.S.
firm in a similar case. CCI denied the accusation.
In the CCI's October order, which also fined Google $163 million, the
company was asked to allow modified versions of its Android operating
system, called Android forks, to be liberally distributed without any
licensing restrictions such as those related to pre-installation of
Google apps.
Amazon told the CCI during the investigation that Google's restrictions
hindered development of its Android fork called Fire OS, and Google said
the watchdog unfairly relied on that in passing its adverse decision
against it, the company said in the June 26 Supreme Court filing.
"Globally, FireOS failed commercially due to poor user experience. In
India, the Fire Phone was not even launched," Google argued in its
1,004-page filing, which has not been made public but was reviewed by
Reuters.
"Thus, the Commission called Amazon’s lack of attempt to compete in
India a failure and attributed it to Google’s agreements."
The CCI's directive was issued "only to protect Amazon - who complained
that its attempts at creating a forked version of the Android did not
work because of (Google's) restrictions."
[to top of second column] |
The logo of Google is seen at the Viva
Technology conference dedicated to innovation and startups at Porte
de Versailles exhibition center in Paris, France, June 14, 2023.
REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes
Google declined to comment, citing ongoing legal proceedings. Amazon
also declined to comment, while the CCI did not respond to the
Alphabet-owned company's court filing, which is set to be heard in
the coming days.
In 2021, South Korea fined Google $159 million for blocking
customized versions of Android.
Google has been particularly concerned about India's Android
decision as the directives were seen even more sweeping than those
imposed in the European Commission's landmark 2018 ruling against
the company's Android market abuse.
Google has challenged both the South Korean and European orders.
In its October ruling, the CCI said its investigators found Google's
contractual restrictions had "reduced the ability and incentive of
device manufacturers to develop and sell" devices operating on
Android forks, hurting consumer interests.
Amazon told Indian investigators the creation of Fire OS, as a
forked Android, took "substantial resources", including thousands of
employee hours, court papers show.
Google is arguing in India's Supreme Court against any penalty and
saying it did not abuse its market position. The CCI wants Google to
comply with its all its directives, the watchdog said in a separate
filing seen by Reuters.
Google has made sweeping changes to its Android business model in
India following CCI's directive.
A lower tribunal ruled that Google should pay the penalty and
confirmed it abused its market position, in line with CCI's
findings, but the U.S. company continues to fight it out in the
Supreme Court.
(Reporting by Arpan Chaturvedi and Aditya Kalra; Editing by Kim
Coghill)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|