India fines Google $162M for anti-competitive practices on Android | Hacker News Reader

India fines Google $162M for anti-competitive practices on Android

techcrunch.com

300 pointsjmsflknr164 comments

Here is the link to original order [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.

Holy 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.

As an Indian, unfortunately I don't have much hope. Even if this is true and somehow got implemented, it has even far reaching worse outcome for the country. I hope that i am wrong but see my other comment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33278016

You want so badly to change an app default that it's the "bane of your existence", but you can't be jazzed to install LineageOS or whatever? That doesn't track.

There are legitimate arguments about product bundling and antitrust to be made, but the simple truth is that expert users with particular application tastes are very well served in the Android ecosystem as it stands.

You actually can have Vanced be the default! Set an app timer for 0hr 0 min on YouTube, and go into the app link behavior in settings to default to Vanced. After that, links should open in Vanced. In apps that have browsers, view the link in the internal browser if it brings you to YouTube.com, and it should redirect.

That is a great work around. Thanks for sharing!

Any detailed instructions for lay people please. I would like to use this, but don't know how to set the app timer you mentioned. Thanks.

It’s under the new “digital well-being” menu in settings. Quickest way to get there is to tap and hold YouTube’s app icon, then click the little (I) or gear, which will take you to YouTube’s individual settings. One of them should be the app timer.

I believe that's a Samsung-specifc feature, no?

It’s available on stock android as well (I use a Pixel). Not sure about general availability.

Looks like they went way beyond the EU's restrictions. I doubt Google can do the whole "pay for Play Store by device unless you agree to install these other apps" workaround. Hopefully the EU will catch up here and the US will do something similar.

here is my take.

currently there are all microsoft-y nudge user till they allow then say "user accepted"... case in point. i have a moto phone that has stock android. very nice. it has default sms as "messages". this app keeps nudging me to use "chat features" and other bs so the "dont use connected features" line is really small while accept is a big button. they dont want me to not accept so they keep pushing me.

same for "play protect". i have decided to not accept it so every often i install an app it asks me if i want to enable it.

same for "enable location". i keep my location off so when i have to use an app, i turn it on and i get a message "for better experience, tun on device location which uses google location service". so if i accept this, "google location accuracy" and "emergency location service" and even wifi scanning (sometimes) gets enabled so these are really scummy techniques.

i use F-droid as my default app store and aurora store to download apps not on f-droid. haven't signed in to play store because i don't have a google account.

these "keep nudging till the user accepts" should be banned as well. if the user does not want to allow location accuracy, don't auto enable it.

I agree. There should be a "No means no."

That is not just a problem when it comes to app permissions...

what do you mean?

That there seems to be a general problem in society to accept that no actually means no. And not a "no, but sure maybe just try harder".

100% agree to that. my original comment said the thing. you have put it way shorter but right at the mark

Can I have the same for Micrsoft and Apple for both mobile and desktop?

For Apple I get it's different since they don't have OEMs selling Macs/iPhones/iPads but I feel like many similar restrictions should apply

Examples:

> Google shall allow the users, during the initial device setup, to choose their default search engine for all search entry points.

> Google shall not offer any monetary/ other incentives to, or enter into any arrangement with, OEMs for ensuring exclusivity for its search services.

Seems like this should go both ways given the previous one.

> Google shall allow the developers of app stores to distribute their app stores through Play Store.

> Google shall not restrict un-installing of its pre-installed apps by the users.

I know Apple has done a better job of this now than in the past but I can't uninstall the dialer on iOS where as I can on Android, as just one example still left. I'm pretty sure I can set the default camera app on Android as well and delete the built in one though I haven't used android in years so no idea if that's still a possibility.

Also, while we're at it. Will any of this apply to Chromebooks?

Nobody cares about Chromebooks. They only matter in schools and they're almost certainly illegal in schools, so that will self-solve when those charges get addressed.

Illegal how?

There are multiple cases being processed in Denmark at the moment. While Chromebooks aren't outright illegal, Google's processing of school children's personal data might apparently violates the GDPR.

Minors can't consent to being spied on. And being a school to which they are obligated by law to go, they can't be forced to consent even if they could consent.

Their parents are consenting.

being forced is not legal consent, no. And being forced without being asked is even worse.

Christ, google must be kicking themselves for being so permissive with android. Unless they impose similar requirements on apple, this seems like a punishment for being as permissive as they are.

iPhone has a tiny market share in India. They probably don't consider them large enough to be worth regulating.

Apple is not selling iOS to Samsung with extra conditions like : you should not offer other operating systems or you should not pre-install our competitors", "you should not make our apps uninstallable"

Apple is breaching the rules but in a different way

Android is platform used by multiple OEMs, Apple is only one.

> ix. Google shall allow the developers of app stores to distribute their app stores through Play Store.

This is a big one.

I hope they require the same for iOS, but for some reason that doesn't seem to be happening anywhere.

The US seems to be one of the few markets where iOS is used by a majority of users.

iOS is a rounding error in India, Android has a near monopoly, that also helps to legitimate their crackdown against anti-competitive practices.

> iv. Google shall not offer any monetary/ other incentives to, or enter into any arrangement with, OEMs for ensuring exclusivity for its search services.

Can someone explain why this is imposed? It seems like a fair deal if google offers money to samsung to be the default search provider. How is it different from google offering money to mozilla for the same?

Setting as default is quite different from "ensuring exclusivity." I'd have no problem banning Google from paying companies to be the only search engine usable on a phone.

iv. Google shall not offer any monetary/ other incentives to, or enter into any arrangement with, OEMs for ensuring exclusivity for its search services.

That's a threat about $15bn of Apple's revenue...

Problem is, it's Apple. I mean lets be frank, is 15B even 10% of Apple's revenue?

Maybe it is? Maybe it's even more than 10%?

But I doubt it.

I mean forget revenue, I bet you could lob 15B off their profit from last year and they'd still be more profitable than they'd ever been.

If you want to hurt big companies like banks, oil companies, healthcare behemoths so on and so forth, you have to hit them where it hurts. You can't be trimming around the edges and expect changes in behavior.

Not caring about 10%, your numbers, of your revenue is how you become the most valueable company on the planet. Not.

If "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.

Microsoft'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.

> 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?

This 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.

I wouldn't describe Nokia, Blackberry, or Palm as 'better options' in that space.

I'm not sure what you are pointing at, what are Nokia, Blackberry, or Palm alternatives of ? They all peaked at different areas and I feel little overlap.

Your post had a few implications.

1. There were phones better than Windows Phone.

2. Microsoft failed to bully its way into dominance with a worse product.

3. Google and Apple, on the other hand, did.

What were the better products than Windows Phone? Certainly it wasn't Palm, Nokia, or Blackberry. You don't seem to think so, either.

Was it Android and IOS? Does this mean you think they are the better/best products? If so, why do you also assert #3?

I see iOS and android as fundamentally better than the Windows Phone. Windows Phone was an innovative idea and a breeze of fresh air, but was way too opinionated and only shined in some specific usage patterns. That’s why I think developers had such a hard time to adapt to it. If I had to choose a dead horse, I’d choose Palm’s WebOS as a more viable idea that was very poorly executed and way too early for the market.

> Google and Apple, on the other hand, did.

Both these companies bullied competition in other aspects than the OS in itself.

Google bullied makers through the Play Store+Play services bundling, forcing them to get rid of preinstalled third party stores and keep the Google search widget on the home screen and Google as the default search engine.

Apple bullied app makers by kicking any third party store, third party web engine, blocked third party content store and mail clients from getting default status. Apple’s top position as a music service comes from the iPod, but was also clearly cemented by locking out competition as the iPhone was the top selling smartphone. People are a lot more divided on where’s Apple’s fault, but at least I don’t see it as an issue of OS bundling the same way Microsoft crossed the line on OS bundling. Times have changed in this respect.

> Microsoft's OS dominance through Windows is probably why Windows Phone is so successful, right?

Google software and Android literally pushed Windows Phone out of existence, yes.

You can't possibly think Windows would have the market share it has now if people were able to just walk into the store and buy the same laptops with Linux installed.

Linux on the Deaktop barely worked for non IT specialists, at the time of that lawsuit.

To those it's not clear to: Note that the parent comment is sarcasm.

Yes because, Apple with only 3% market share in India should gain the same attention as Android.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/262157/market-share-held...

Have you ever thought that Apple’s market cap may be because people choose to pay a premium for their hardware using their own free will?

Where Microsoft had marketing and familiarity, Apple has/had a better touch (UX as it's often called).

Unfortunately for people who entered their ecosystem, there is a heavy influence to keep them there (more than a walled garden, an active insulation and inculcation - its hard to take your life elsewhere if you bought into the Apple ecosystem).

That's disappeared a bit with the cloud, but native apps still perform better, and a side effect of their walled garden is the apps that do survive tend to lack a lot of the junk and spyware that android users must dodge...

I think its a strong word to say "choose" - rather they are compelled.

Ofc some choose, but thousands of dollars in, its hard for the average to justify sinking that capital. Android phones don't sync with iCloud, don't connect to Apple TV, don't have iMessage or Facetime (at least I think not), don't sync their music libraries and don't do whatever it is Apple is selling gadget for these days.

I think if users were just choosing, it would be as easy to switch as it is to put on a different shirt. I can buy a shirt, I can't choose a phone.

I say this as someone unwilling to invest in phones or supporting gadgets, and also not entirely happy with Android either.

> Unfortunately for people who entered their ecosystem, there is a heavy influence to keep them there (more than a walled garden, an active insulation and inculcation - its hard to take your life elsewhere if you bought into the Apple ecosystem).

Where?

Any music you bought from iTunes since 2009 was DRM free. Apple Music runs on Android, Amazon Fire devices and a few other non Apple platforms.

The AppleTV app is available on every streaming platform and you can watch movies and TV shows you purchased. Apple also participates in the Movies AnyWhere initiative along with most of the major studios. Meaning when you purchase a movie from Apple, Amazon, Google, Vudu etc they are added to all of your libraries.

AirPlay support is available on Roku devices as well as a few other platforms.

AirPods work as standard BT devices on non iOS devices.

The standard file dialog that apps use to save and load files surfaces all of your installed storage providers (Dropbox, Google Drive, OneDrive, etc) equally along with iCloud. If you are on an Android and have to get files off of iCloud, you go to the web.

FaceTime has been available for Android for a couple of years.

> don't sync their music libraries and don't do whatever it is Apple is selling gadget for these days.

Almost everyone uses a streaming service in 2022 and Apple Music is available for Android.

All your examples seem to be of running Apple stuff on Android.

None of it is about actually moving off it.

The few examples you mention such as bluetooth and mp3 files from iTunes are to do with an industry standard, not because of something Apple did.

” Apple also participates in the Movies AnyWhere initiative along with most of the major studios. Meaning when you purchase a movie from Apple, Amazon, Google, Vudu etc they are added to all of your libraries.”

I am not familiar with this, which libraries where?

Regardless, this doesnt seem like a winning proposition "Use android and just use all our apps on it", why?? You switch off Apple because it has issues so you continue to use Apple?

Better off never to enter in the first place.

> The few examples you mention such as bluetooth and mp3 files from iTunes are to do with an industry standard, not because of something Apple did.

“The industry” didn’t push for DRM free music. Apple did.

https://macdailynews.com/2007/02/06/apple_ceo_steve_jobs_pos...

“The Industry” wanted Apple to license FairPlay DRM to other sellers.

The claim was that you were locked into Apple’s ecosystem. The truth is that you can just as easily have a mix of Apple, Android Macs and Windows.

I forgot to mention that Apple has official plugins for Chrome and Firefox for Windows that let you sync bookmarks with Safari/iCloud.

> I am not familiar with this, which libraries where

https://help.moviesanywhere.com/hc/en-us/articles/1150045761...

It’s not a backdoor hack.

> Regardless, this doesnt seem like a winning proposition "Use android and just use all our apps on it", why?? You switch off Apple because it has issues so you continue to use Apple?

All what apps? You copy your files from iCloud to another storage provider. There are plenty of utilities that allow you to copy playlists over. Music you bought from iTunes is DRM free, etc.

No company that you buy TV shows from allow you to transfer them DRN free and there is nothing that Apple can do about the movie studios that won’t participate in MoviesAnywhere.

If you buy a digital book from Amazon, you have to use “their app” on other platforms. If you use Google Docs, you have to either export it or use “their apps” on other platforms. What’s the difference?

   The 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.

India 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.

Everyone should hate big foreign monopolies.

Check out ONDC 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.

Good 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.

i don't understand what you are trying to say?

I 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."

nah.... 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

other comment mentioning that "Ambani’s Reliance co will launch search next month." is not realistic. I mean even Bing is not able to capture significant market share of Google after all these years.

> 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.

however, this comment is also related to Ambani’s Jio (Subsidiary of Reliance) are planning to launch Android devices. And mind it, Jio is one of the largest telecom provider in India with the blessing of ruling party. Jio also have suits of all kind of applications like chat, payment, audio streaming like Spotify, and what not, etc. which is less of utility app and can be use as surveillance system for the government in the future.

India is heading towards government system like deadly mix of Russia in terms of democracy and China in terms of surveillance system (look at the recent telecom act amendment proposed by government in last month. Basically it can force any VoIP services such as WhatsApp to verify user identity.)

Current government was not approving WhatsApp license for UPI for years until after WhatsApp decided to invest in Jio [https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/24/india-approves-facebooks-5...] At that time few peoples were discussing that this investment is nothing but to bribe government and/or Jio to get UPI license. Now WhatsApp got that permission [https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/13/whatsapp-permitted-to-exte...]

Ah! the whole theory that Reliance is a BJP's poodle. Go back and look 1986 Cricket World Cup and what is it named.. and .. you got it right, Reliance Cup.

The Ambanis are no one's poodles all Indian Politicians are their poodles. The monumental growth of Reliance from a small textile company to a petro-chemical behemoth to a huge conglomerate happened under the rule of Indian National Congress.

> The Ambanis are no one's poodles all Indian Politicians are their poodles.

I am not denying that. But the way, current government is working, good luck with current situation improving anymore. And BJP or Congress or any other party politicians, especially in India, like to enjoy absolute control over citizens. So by some miracle if other party got in power in future then also they will not work to correct wrong done by current government.

*1987…but other than that, spot on

So basically you're saying that here's an American company that is monopolising a critical market in my country, but I prefer that monopoly to continue because I have built up this scenario in which an Indian company might monopolise it instead.

Interesting.

I mean, yes, quite literally, because Google's "monopolisation" pales in comparison to the insane influence Jio already has. Jio was the first telecom in India that required it's users to submit fingerprints to get a SIM card. You can't get more explicitly dystopian than that - want internet? Submit your fingerprints so we can link it to your National Identity Document and who you call/text.

This is a complete fabrication. Aadhaar verification via biometrics was permitted for all financial, telecom and other services simultaneously. I got fingerprinted for an Airtel SIM and a Kotak Bank account first and Jio much later.

> This is a complete fabrication.

it isn't fabrication, when fingerprint authentication was (may be still) the ONLY option provided by Jio. I went to buy Jio sim and decided to not buy only because there wasn't other option like submitting copy of document which all other telecom companies provide.

One is a monopoly because they outcompeted their competitors, the other is a monopoly due to state force.

> 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?

That'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.

Open access will also enable OSS apps. Having alternatives would be terrific.

I hope people don't make the assumption that anything that's not coming from Google is harmful and a potential adware/malware. People who support Apple's app store monopoly also use the same logic. Maybe the Indian government needs to push separate bills prohibiting manufactures from packaging crapware. But this is a step in the right direction IMO.

> Maybe the Indian government needs to push separate bills prohibiting manufactures from packaging crapware

One person's crapware is another person's batteries-included-ware.

We wouldn't want to ban Sony MP3 players from including an app that plays music, right?

Similar to how we wouldn't want iPods to be banned from coming with an in-built Apple Music.app client[1]

Google's bundled-in variant of an internet browser _may_ be as harmful as Safari on iOS or, quite formidably[2], Internet Explorer on Windows. But unless governments can unambiguously discern whether Chrome is adware/crapware or batteries-included-software we'd not get much use out of regulation.

[1] Please don't flame on me with "iPods don't have Apple Music". What I meant to say is that the on-device application software that ran on iPods is _identical_ to that running on macOS, iPhone etc. It's pretty much the exact same music player code.

[2] IE bundling into Windows is literally what got Microsoft branded as anti-competitive by the Justice Dept. in the late 90s / early 2000s

> We wouldn't want to ban Sony MP3 players from including an app that plays music, right?

Maybe? There was that time Sony decided to install a rootkit when you played a CD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk...

If Apple ipod is market leader in music player then the device owner should be able to uninstall the "Apple music" and install any 3rd party developed music player on it, this should be OK.

"One person's crapware is another person's batteries-included-ware."

Point me at an android phone mfg in the past couple years that didn't come with not just FB preinstalled, but unable to delete. Or a samsung phone that doesn't have that annoying nagware you can't get rid of.

This isn't about 'batteries included' its about junkware being made impossible to remove.

What makes you special enough we all have to do things your way? Nothing. Just putting up with nonsense pushed by the likes of people who think they know best.

pixel?

moto phones

Nokia

We don't need to assume. We have decades of experience and data showing that mobile operators will jam phones full of as much spyware, adware, and experience-ruining garbage as they are legally and technically able.

Yeah, this is basically why Android One, Pixel & Nexus phones, and phones with “Stock Android” we’re/are so popular among tech people because they didn’t come with the carrier or OEM forced uninstallable crapware.

Well, it’s a good thing we have real lawyers and judges - one of which knocked Epics silly defense that Apple has a monopoly on its own platform was just like saying Sony had a monopoly on PS games that can be distributed.

Except Motorola (now owned by Lenovo and claims closest to default Android) most of the Chinese phones still come with their own bloatware. Xiaomi has many default apps including their own Messaging, file manager, dialer. These come with their own user agreement and privacy policy.

Some of these apps are good to have while others are just bloat.

Motorola is chinese??

I believe Lenovo is, but it's been a while since I've actually looked it up.

Samsung too has a tonne of bloatware crap. I bought a phone for 30K (which is a decent amount for a phone IMO) and it was loaded with absolute crap I don't use and can't even remove with adb.

But I've been always disabling (using Android Debug Bridge) native Google apps (Gmail, Youtube ...) and using alternatives from F-Droid including apps for phone call and messaging. In fact, I have avoided signing into Play Store on all androids I have ever used so far.

> adwarecrap

You mean Google bundling their apps with spyware, then sending me ads based on the info gathered is not adwarecrap?

Its adware. It's also better than a lot of apps that fall into the crap category. For instance, maps will show me maps that are farily accurate. Many of the bundled apps i would get in the past - verizon maps or whatever - weren't actually able to do their purported job, just display ads until crash.

In the past few years, the Google experience has been devolving. GMail loads a ton of JS, app sizes are larger and apps are slower, and Maps won't even show me the name of the town I'm currently in, while navigating (and the UI is terrible).

If it weren't for traffic data and good geocoding, I'd be using OsmAnd all the time (the overall UX is about the same).

having tried android such as samsung vivo huawei xiaomi - everything just sucks.

switched to apple and it is better, doesnt prompt too much for tracking.

> It's all going to be insufferable adware hell from now on.

The same sorts of rules should prevent those companies from blocking alternative operating systems (including plain AOSP) from supporting the phones of those insufferable adware smartphone manufacturer companies.

The amount in rupees is 1337 crores. I wonder if the CCI was aware of its significance among geeks :-).

But 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.

I 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.

I 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.

I'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.

The 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.

> What Google requires of OEMs has been known for a long time and isn't a secret.

They aren't being fined for keeping secrets.

> Huawei and others successfully sell Android forks with alternative stores and apps.

If it takes a 1 billion person market with no access to Google services and multiple gigantic partially state-owned companies (Baidu, Huawei, and Tencent at least) to create a competitor that's only viable in that one market, I would argue that it's good evidence India is on the right track here saying that Google has market dominance.

yeah, in india, google HAS monopoly. iphones are TOO expensive for the masses. you can buy 12 moto phones or xiaomi phones instead of a single iphone.

> that Google has market dominance.

Having market dominance isn't illegal. Abusing it is. Google only has stipulations that, if you want to call your device a Google or Android device, you need to have the Play store and a few key services. Anyone can fork Android, put in their own app store, all their own apps, whatever.

Indian tech companies need to either fork and come up with their own eco-system or play by the rules. Not lobby their corrupt government to try to force Google into allowing their crapware and do their marketing for them...

Why would you assume the private sector is corruption free? It seems not playing fair is a fundamental rule of the business game.

India following EU to claim a piece of that ad money.

well, EU claims in billions

In addition to fine, India is asking Google to open up.

I 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.

Governments 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

The 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?

It'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.

1% of profit, that is pretty big.

East India Company took over the country when needed.

Follow the money

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/alphabet-inc/summary?id=d00...

> ix. Google shall allow the developers of app stores to distribute their app stores through Play Store.

This is huge if google follows through

Not that huge. If, however, phone distributors would start providing non-Google app download hubs / stores as the default - _that_ would be more serious.

Already 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.

Anyone 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-in...

That'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.

That sounds really low

Not sure. It says Profits, not Revenue. So may be possible ?

Because 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.

It's 5,593.8 Cr, which is equal to 676.15 million USD. Note: 676.15 = 5593.8*1e7/82.73/1e6.

586.2 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.

Uh oh, it seems like I made a mistake. You may be right! But I am not able to edit my comments now.

< but how to convert to USD? >

You type "586.2 crore indian rupees in U.S dollars" into Google search.

USD 70,757,505.48 https://t.ly/xfAe

This 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.

Aren't PayTM and PhonePe bigger?

Those are insignificant in comparison to Google Pay (or Tez as it used to be called).

Paytm 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-a...

From anecdata it seems that GPay is ubiquitous. The distribution may vary wildly regionally though.

That is simply incorrect.

Google Pay was not installed in my android phone. Bought in August 2022.

This is not true at all, India has a relatively healthy triopoly of payment providers, GPay is definitely not at the top. As someone from New Delhi, very few people around me use GPay, and instead use PayTM.

And the difference is moot since all of these services use UPI anyway, so it's not like Google Pay being a monopoly would drastically change how much data the government can see.

I 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?

Probably. Otherwise, it wouldn't keep happening.

Yes. But they’re a rounding error for FAANG firms.

If i am reading the other threads correctly this is more than yearly profit in India

The 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.

For once I approve of what my government is doing

Don’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.

I 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.

SC 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.

Google has only 2 months to appeal to SC. And the govt will most likely get the appeal dismissed by the SC immediately.

It 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.

India 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.

Might as well do something about the gambling apps being promoted in sports and by celebrities.

If 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.

These 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.

They've also issued a cease and desist order. If Google continues its anti-competitive behavior, they can slap it with a much bigger fine.

Disallowing Google on Huawei phones destroyed Huawei in Spain (at least) basically overnight. Nothing wrong with their phones, just useless ...

I had a laught looking at the picture, given that apparently they are killing Google Assistant.

Wow ! One Hundred Sixyt Million Dollars! Whatever will google do now!

i 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.

Did they fine Apple as well for similar anti-competitive practices?

Apple is not in a dominant market position.

Pot meet Kettle

Missed a chance to fine billions instead of millions.

India fines Google 0.00000005 seconds of profit...

In other words, Ambani’s Reliance co will launch search next month.

Imagine suing Linus Torvalds for giving something away for free and having the audacity of rejecting pull requests.

Linus 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

Isn’t Android open source?

I 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

Reply on news.ycombinator.com