23 ms·
India fines Google $162M for anti-competitive practices on Android
- bumpian 4y agoDid they fine Apple as well for similar anti-competitive practices?
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 4y agoApple is not in a dominant market position.
- mavu 4y agoWow ! One Hundred Sixyt Million Dollars! Whatever will google do now!
- asadlionpk 4y agoIndia following EU to claim a piece of that ad money.
- robofanatic 4y agowell, EU claims in billions
- nmridul 4y agoIn addition to fine, India is asking Google to open up.
- Nextgrid 4y agoI don't mind governments taking ad money even if they were outright stealing it, because if anything it puts pressure on companies not to deal with ads at all which would be a net benefit to society, productivity and mental health worldwide. I like having the option of buying products that have nothing to do with ads - unfortunately in the current situation, everything has at least some ties to this industry, so effectively we currently don't have a choice regardless of whether we're willing to pay. This kind of pressure will hopefully change this.
- Apocryphon 4y agoGovernments around the world getting more belligerent towards big tech, just see the numerous jurisdictions scrutinizing Apple, too. "Tell his children that government is more powerful than any corporation, and the only reason they think it tilts the other way is because we poor public servants are always looking for some fat private sector's payoff down the road. But I am NOT looking. And by the time they pull the strings to force me out it will be too late." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A98vqgBsoxQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A98vqgBsoxQ
- webmobdev 4y agoThe Competition Commission of India, which began investigating Google several years ago after complaints from local firms, said in a press release that Google requiring device manufacturers to pre-install its entire Google Mobile Suite and mandating prominent placement of those apps “amounts to imposition of unfair condition on the device manufacturers” and thus was in “contravention of the provisions of Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Act.” It also ordered the Android-maker to not offer any incentives to smartphone makers to exclusively carry its search services. ... The antitrust watchdog said in its statement today that device manufacturers should not be forced to install Google’s bouquet of apps and the search giant should not deny access to its Play Services APIs and monetary and other incentives to vendors. Good. Ensuring monopolies don't crush competition, and creating a level playing business field is what prevents capitalism from becoming dysfunctional.
- aatharuv 4y agoIndia really hates big _foreign_ monopolies. The last really big foreign monopoly to get a place in India, the British East India Company ended up taking over the country.
- KaoruAoiShiho 4y agoEveryone should hate big foreign monopolies.
- db1234 4y agoCheck out ONDC https://fortune.com/2022/08/02/why-india-could-single-handedly-shape-the-future-of-e-commerce-this-summer-vivek-wadhwa-alex-salkever/ https://fortune.com/2022/08/02/why-india-could-single-handed... It's like UPI but for e-commerce. We can expect companies like Amazon to make noise about this.
- tatpacc 4y agoHere is the link to original order [https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/press-release/details/261/0 https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/press-release/details/261/0] some experts 13. Accordingly, in terms of the provisions of Section 27 of the Act, the Commission has imposed monetary penalty as well as issued cease and desist order against Google from indulging in anti-competitive practices that have been found to be in contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act. Some of the measures that were indicated by the Commission are as follows: i. OEMs shall not be restrained from (a) choosing from amongst Google’s proprietary applications to be pre-installed and should not be forced to pre-install a bouquet of applications, and (b) deciding the placement of pre-installed apps, on their smart devices. ii. Licensing of Play Store (including Google Play Services) to OEMs shall not be linked with the requirement of pre-installing Google search services, Chrome browser, YouTube, Google Maps, Gmail or any other application of Google. iii. Google shall not deny access to its Play Services APIs to disadvantage OEMs, app developers and its existing or potential competitors. This would ensure interoperability of apps between Android OS which complies with compatibility requirements of Google and Android Forks. By virtue of this remedy, the app developers would be able to port their apps easily onto Android forks. iv. Google shall not offer any monetary/ other incentives to, or enter into any arrangement with, OEMs for ensuring exclusivity for its search services. v. Google shall not impose anti-fragmentation obligations on OEMs, as presently being done under AFA/ ACC. For devices that do not have Google’s proprietary applications pre-installed, OEMs should be permitted to manufacture/ develop Android forks based smart devices for themselves. vi. Google shall not incentivise or otherwise obligate OEMs for not selling smart devices based on Android forks. vii. Google shall not restrict un-installing of its pre-installed apps by the users. viii. Google shall allow the users, during the initial device setup, to choose their default search engine for all search entry points. Users should have the flexibility to easily set as well as easily change the default settings in their devices, in minimum steps possible. ix. Google shall allow the developers of app stores to distribute their app stores through Play Store.
- bradleykingz 4y agoHoly hell, this seems a lot more comprehensive than I'd ever expected. Good job India. I hope this spreads to the rest of the world somehow. The fact that it's impossible to uninstall YouTube or use Vanced as the default for YouTube.com links is the bane of my existence.
- colpabar 4y agoI feel like I see headlines like this all the time. Some country/government fines some tech giant some large amount of money. But I always wonder, do these fines ever get paid?
- rarec 4y agoProbably. Otherwise, it wouldn't keep happening.
- atdrummond 4y agoYes. But they’re a rounding error for FAANG firms.
- whimsicalism 4y agoIf i am reading the other threads correctly this is more than yearly profit in India
- ocdtrekkie 4y agoThe fine isn't that key an issue, it's the order to comply going forwards. Read the comment summarizing what Google is no longer permitted to do in India.
- cudgy 4y agoAnyone know how much net profit Google makes in one year from the India market in USD? One article states Rs 586.2 crore, but how to convert to USD? https://m.timesofindia.com/business/india-business/google-india-fy20-revenue-rises-35-to-rs-5593-8-crore-profit-up-24/articleshow/79431004.cms https://m.timesofindia.com/business/india-business/google-in...
- codegeek 4y agoThat's about $71M USD. (1 Crore = 10,000,000 units). Currently, 1 USD = 83 INR So, 586 crores INR = 5860000000 INR = $71,000,000 USD EDIT: It seems like some people are saying the correct number is not 586 crores but 5k crores which is 10 times more.
- swampthinker 4y agoThat sounds really low
- codegeek 4y agoNot sure. It says Profits, not Revenue. So may be possible ?
- programmer_dude 4y agoBecause it is incorrect. The correct figure is 5,593.8 Cr, which is equal to 676.15 million USD. Note: 676.15 = 5593.8*1e7/82.73/1e6.
- programmer_dude 4y agoIt's 5,593.8 Cr, which is equal to 676.15 million USD. Note: 676.15 = 5593.8*1e7/82.73/1e6.
- mmiyer 4y ago586.2 Cr is correct for net profit ("The net profit was higher by about 23.9 per cent at Rs 586.2") which is what the original commentator said. 5,593.8 Cr is revenue.
- keewee7 4y agoGood in theory but Google's Android apps and Google forbidding Indian telcom companies and Chinese smartphone manufactures from installing adwarecrap has made the ultra-cheap smartphone experience somewhat tolerable for hundreds of millions of people. It's all going to be insufferable adware hell from now on.
- acchow 4y ago> It's all going to be insufferable adware hell from now on. Didn't American telecom companies try this? And then the customers eventually found it all insufferable, so the practice was canned?
- summerlight 4y agoThat's mostly because of iOS where Apple has a complete control over. If the half of the market cannot play with those garbage, it is much harder to do that for the rest as well thanks to competition. But AFAIK, iOS has a pretty minimal presence in India so it's not going to be the same situation.
- lenkite 4y agoOpen access will also enable OSS apps. Having alternatives would be terrific.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y agoi don't understand what you are trying to say?
- CobrastanJorji 4y agoI read it as "Google having control was bad, but Google had been using that control to stop very bad things, so in practical terms this is actually bad news."
- 2Gkashmiri 4y agonah.... sure we will have ad filed stores and all that bs but that is currently happening on xiaomi and realme phones anyways.... they have OS level ads and people are fine with it.... i am interested in having F-droid as a respectable store that has some more polish, aurora-store type features would be nice things to have. and having ability to "delete system apps" that is only possible on stock android or in my case moto phones only.... i don't have google crap installed and untill now, xiaomi/realme/oppo and others couldn't do that even if they wanted. now they can..... think of it this way. W10, w11 has a lot of nonsense but for technically inclined, there is the debloater so anyone who is interested can do that and that should happen here also
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hiyer 4y agoThe amount in rupees is 1337 crores. I wonder if the CCI was aware of its significance among geeks :-).
- sandGorgon 4y agoThis is a by-product of a simple thing: Google being the largest payment system provider in India. Google Pay in India is basically CashApp++ . And the govt is paranoid about the "Big Tech takeover of banking". Which is not very dissimilar to "Bust Up Big Tech Act". Google Pay is pre-installed on every android system. This is basically a browser war part 2.0. Except for payments.
- kylehotchkiss 4y agoAren't PayTM and PhonePe bigger?
- metahost 4y agoThose are insignificant in comparison to Google Pay (or Tez as it used to be called).
- perryizgr8 4y agoPaytm and phone pe are not insignificant. > PhonePe (49.25%), Google Pay (34.6%), Paytm (10.65%) and CRED (1.8%) together processed 636 Cr UPI transactions worth INR 10.32 Lakh Cr https://inc42.com/buzz/top-four-upi-apps-held-96-market-in-august-2022-retain-consistent-cap-share/ https://inc42.com/buzz/top-four-upi-apps-held-96-market-in-a...
- metahost 4y agoFrom anecdata it seems that GPay is ubiquitous. The distribution may vary wildly regionally though.
- boruto 4y agoThat is simply incorrect.
- rushikesh98 4y agoGoogle Pay was not installed in my android phone. Bought in August 2022.
- riddleronroof 4y agoIn other words, Ambani’s Reliance co will launch search next month.
- bl4ck_goku 4y agoMight as well do something about the gambling apps being promoted in sports and by celebrities.
- IceWreck 4y ago> ix. Google shall allow the developers of app stores to distribute their app stores through Play Store. This is huge if google follows through
- einpoklum 4y agoNot that huge. If, however, phone distributors would start providing non-Google app download hubs / stores as the default - _that_ would be more serious.
- lern_too_spel 4y agoAlready happens on Samsung phones. Used to happen on Motorola and others as well. And of course, Amazon tablets don't include Play Store at all. This ruling has no effect on that. It just says that Google can't require manufacturers to install Chrome, Assistant, and other Google apps if they want to have Play Store on their devices. What will probably happen is that Google will accept some other form of payment to get access to Play Store.
- CosmicShadow 4y agoThese fines are always at least 1 to 2 decimal points too small for their targets to even care about. Want to hurt them? Fine them 10% of their yearly revenue, that'll get their attention.
- ummonk 4y agoThey've also issued a cease and desist order. If Google continues its anti-competitive behavior, they can slap it with a much bigger fine.
- planetsprite 4y agoIf "platform" companies like Apple, Google, Microsoft weren't capable of advantaging themselves via anti-competitive practices, their stock values wouldn't be nearly as high. Their implicit leverage over the markets they oversee via their OSes is the core of why they are the biggest companies in the world. Fines are a cost of doing business, hardly a deterrent when your product (your OS) is the conduit through which entire industries operate.
- musicale 4y agoMicrosoft's OS dominance through Windows is probably why Windows Phone is so successful, right? ;-) Presumably Apple also leveraged the Mac's unquestioned dominance of the PC space to enable the iPhone to beat established incumbents like Nokia, Blackberry and Palm. And Android undoubtedly became popular primarily because of Google's dominance in web search. I can't believe government regulators let these companies get away with such things.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago> Microsoft's OS dominance through Windows is probably why Windows Phone is so successful, right? ;-) Where can I go on MSN to read up more on your explanation for Windows Phone dominance?
- makeitdouble 4y agoThis is of course an excellent point: Microsoft getting repeatedly fined and slapped with anti-trust violations had actual results on their business practices. It might not have stopped them from other problematic behaviors, put certainly had a braking effect on the "nothing can stop us" train they were riding. The direct effect could be the Windows Phone not crushing the better options, yes. As you point out, Apple and Google sure need the same treatment, and it seems something is finally happening after all these years of abuse.
- vkou 4y agoI wouldn't describe Nokia, Blackberry, or Palm as 'better options' in that space.
- Mikeb85 4y agoBut Google doesn't require Android makers to bundle it's apps unless they specifically want to be called a Google device (and thus take advantage of the free marketing). Plenty of Chinese manufacturers ship without Google bits.
- germandiago 4y agoI see it another way: govts want money. They steal it from the work of people and profitable companies. I came to the cornclusion that beyond that, they do not care. Of course, they need excuses. But their motivation is not the excuses. With war it also happens the same. I do not know who said that, but someone well-known once said: for a war you need two things, one is the real reason and the other is the excuse to make it happen.
- enragedcacti 4y agoI highly recommend you read the original ruling, it is in English and it explains how they view the relationship between the Play Store, Android OEMs, the MADA, and other Google services.
- ocdtrekkie 4y agoI'm confident if people had actually read the MADA and the AFA, Google would enjoy virtually no public support for their behavior. Of course, there's a reason Google considers those documents confidential.
- Mikeb85 4y agoThe real issue is that Indian tech companies want to be able to bundle their crap with Android phones and still take advantage of the Google phone/Android brand. They're welcome to sell forks and bundle all the alternative software they want with whatever store they want, they just can't call it an Android phone or call themselves an Android manufacturer. What Google requires of OEMs has been known for a long time and isn't a secret. And as I already pointed out, companies like Huawei and others successfully sell Android forks with alternative stores and apps.
- NayamAmarshe 4y agoIf things like these happen to small companies, no one funds them, people run away from them and employees try to look for jobs elsewhere but when it comes to monopolies, suddenly these illegal activities are all good and ignored.
- cute_boi 4y agoMissed a chance to fine billions instead of millions.
- rajivjain 4y agoThe American technology companies are looking increasingly vulnerable especially internationally. Tech companies are the new wave of American mega corporations. I wonder how the mega corporation of past managed to navigate these challenges? Did US government play any role in protecting the US companies? If so, what drove it, more business friendly Washington, more effective lobbying, or something else?
- klabb3 4y agoIt's $160M in a country with 600M phones, where 97% of those are Android. Obviously Google doesn't want fines to be public (to avoid encouraging others), but it's not that much money in the greater context.
- whimsicalism 4y ago1% of profit, that is pretty big.
- sa1 4y agoEast India Company took over the country when needed.
- weberer 4y agoFollow the money https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/alphabet-inc/summary?id=d000067823 https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/alphabet-inc/summary?id=d00...
- 10g1k 4y agoIndia fines Google 0.00000005 seconds of profit...
- JaggerFoo 4y agoPot meet Kettle
- homelessgolden 4y agoDon’t expect anything to happen immediately. This order will be appealed and Google will take it up to the Indian Supreme Court. 2/3 more years till it all gets resolved. Most likely parts of this order will get rescinded blin appeal. I don’t see the whole thing going away and certainly there is impact on Google’s business practices. However this will take time to play out. In the next 2/3 years Google will try to workaround these restrictions as much as it can by sticking to the letter of the order while maintaining its advantage.
- rushikesh98 4y agoI don't see SC deliberating too much on this issue. It's a policy and commercial fairness issue. Also, The SC has been leaning in the direction of libre and privacy friendly software so far. The SC is not there to negate every government decisions.
- homelessgolden 4y agoSC may not negate. But CCI rulings can be appealed in SC. And that process will take time. You can be sure Google will appeal and drag things. And while I don’t expect SC to overrule the whole decision some elements will get eased for Google in the process.
- rushikesh98 4y agoGoogle has only 2 months to appeal to SC. And the govt will most likely get the appeal dismissed by the SC immediately.
- homelessgolden 4y agoIt is a long process. They can appeal as a first step to the Competition Appellate Tribunal. Then after that to SC. Then even if the appeals are all dismissed they will get some time to comply. Don’t expect the entire ruling to stand as is during this process and don’t expect any actual on the ground changes for a 2/3 years more.
- bigbacaloa 4y agoDisallowing Google on Huawei phones destroyed Huawei in Spain (at least) basically overnight. Nothing wrong with their phones, just useless ...
- laxmin 4y agoIndia is trying to grow and bolster its smartphones manufacturing capabilities. India’s domestic market for smartphones is one of the world’s largest and is still growing. More and more local apps are gaining traction due to cheap data plans (Thanks to Jio and soon, Adani entering the fray) At this point, the OS is crucial to ensure competitive growth and a level playing field. Hence this decision will have the full backing of the Government which will even bring in new legislature to see to it that the Giants don’t monopolise everything.
- hknmtt 4y agoi just got a new phone and it feels like i became indebted to the devil without actually signing anything. i might go back to my 7yo phone with outdated android. this is horrible what the phones have become.
- pjmlp 4y agoI had a laught looking at the picture, given that apparently they are killing Google Assistant.
- fareesh 4y agoFor once I approve of what my government is doing
- empathygeezer 4y agoImagine suing Linus Torvalds for giving something away for free and having the audacity of rejecting pull requests.
- another_devy 4y agoLinus Torvalds is not gate keeping official browser, search engine, maps and even package manager for linux. Also I don’t think he is making billions by allowing people to fork and yet not change kernel
- empathygeezer 4y agoIsn’t Android open source?
- hda2 4y agoI think a more accurate analogy would be that Linus is not preventing OEMs from selling computers with other operating systems cougooglegh, or coercing or forcing them into preventing users from switching to other operating systems ahmicrosoftm, or abusing their dominance in other markets to gain an absurd and unfair advantage in unrelated markets cougooglegh. Heavens me, my cough is acting up. I wonder why. I'm glad other countries stepped up and are starting to regulate these companies since the US is obviously refusing to do so. In all ser
- softwareoiu 4y ago
- known 4y ago[dead]