Is Google jamming a 'fork' in the road?
Although Big Tech has been facing the music from competition agencies across the globe, Google had an unusually tough day on 22 June 2021. First, the European Commission (EC) opened an antitrust investigation into Googles conduct in the online advertising technology sector. A few hours later, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) ordered an investigation into Googles conduct in the smart television (STV) sector. The CCI suspects that Google has been preventing STV makers from using modified versions of Android operating system (OS), also called 'Android forks'. A known fork, developed by Amazon, is Fire OS. Despite its success in Amazons TV stick, Fire OS is yet to make a mark on leading STV manufacturers in India. Some industry experts believe that this may be because of Googles anti-forking practices. Since 2015, Amazon and Goggle had been at loggerheads trying to undercut each other. First, Amazon stopped selling Chromecast and Google Home on its website. Then, Google blocked YouTube from Amazons products. The two companies called a truce in 2019. Since then, YouTube is available on FireStick/ Alexa, and Google Home and Chromecast support Amazon Prime Video. Although there may not be any discord between the two companies anymore, Googles policies protect Android from fork competition. If a device maker wants to pre-install the Play Store on its Android device, it needs to sign an agreement with Google called the Android Compatibility Commitment (ACC). The ACC prohibits device makers from using forks across their device portfolios. Due to Androids large market share, most device makers find it commercially unviable not to have an Android device in their portfolio and end up not dealing with forks at all. The lack of demand disincentivizes investments in the development of forks. This impedes innovation and limits consumer choice to only newer versions of Android for better experience. The CCI complaint was filed by two individuals who alleged that Googles agreements with STV makers such as Xiaomi and TCL restrict them from using Android forks on their devices. Another allegation is that STV makers must pre-install the entire suite of Google Apps and cannot select apps for their device. This could protect or even bolster Googles market positions in other products such as internet search (Google Search), video streaming (YouTube) and web browser (Chrome). These allegations are similar to the ones made against Google in the smartphones case where a CCI investigation is ongoing. Interestingly, this is the fourth investigation ordered by the CCI against Google. Another ongoing investigation against Google relates to Google Pay (Google Tax case). In 2018, the CCI penalised Google for abusing its dominance in the online search market. Whilst many countries have probed Googles conduct in the smartphone OS market, India may be the first to investigate Googles policies in the STV OS space. In 2018, the EC fined Google 4.3 billion for prohibiting use of forks by device makers and mandating pre-installation of its proprietary apps on Android based devices. Although Google appealed the EC decision, Hiroshi Lockheimer, Googles senior vice-president, wrote a blog. 'Complying with the ECs Android decision, stating, Going forward, Android partners wishing to distribute Google apps may also build non-compatible, or forked, smartphones and tablets for the European Economic Area (EEA)". However, he did not specifically state anything about STVs. Interestingly, the complainants told the CCI that Google had already modified its agreements based on the 2018 EC order. Although only the CCI investigation would reveal if any modifications were made for the Indian market, STV maker Onida does offer both Android STVs and Fire OS based STVs in India. If the CCI inquiry indeed yields some market correction, Android users may get an option to choose from a list of apps instead of enduring pre-installed Google apps. It may be possible to even have the Fire stick interface on your favourite brands STV and Alexa on its remote without having to purchase an additional TV stick. Currently, one could only imagine the comfort of dealing with one remote, that too with Alexa. This is what competition law can do: ensure benefits to consumers through more choices at better prices. Vivek Agarwal is partner, competition law, at DMD Advocates. These are his personal views. Subscribe to Mint Newsletters * Enter a valid email * Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.