CCI probes Google for alleged unfair business ways in smart TV operating systems market

Read Time:2 Minute, 56 Second

After assessing a complaint, the watchdog has reached the prima-facie view that Google is dominant within the relevant marketplace for licensable smart TV device operating systems in India.
The Competition Commission has ordered an in depth probe against Google for alleged anti-competitive practices within the smart television operating systems market within the country.

After assessing a complaint, the watchdog has reached the prima-facie view that Google is dominant within the relevant marketplace for licensable smart TV device operating systems in India.

In a 24-page order, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) said that prima-facie mandatory pre-installation of all the Google applications under TADA amounts to imposition of unfair conditions on the smart TV device manufacturers.

This is contravention of Section 4(2)(a) of the Competition Act, the regulator said, adding that it also “amounts to clear leveraging of Google”s dominance live Store to guard the relevant markets like online video hosting services offered by YouTube, etc”.

The latter contravenes Section 4(2)(e) of the Act and every one these aspects warrant an in depth investigation, CCI said within the order dated June 22.

TADA refers to Television App contract (TADA). Section 4 pertains to abuse of dominant position.

A Google spokesperson said, “we are confident that our smart TV licensing practices are in compliance with all applicable competition laws”.

“The emerging smart TV sector in India is flourishing , due partially to Google”s free licensing model and Android TV competes with numerous well-established TV OSs like FireOS, Tizen, and WebOS,” the spokesperson said during a statement.

Citing submissions made by Google, the regulator said the corporate enters into two agreements with Android TV licensees — TADA and Android Compatibility Commitment (ACC).

Google makes Android Open Source Project (AOSP) available to any third parties under an open source license but the AOSP license doesn’t grant Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) the proper to distribute Google”s proprietary apps like Play Store and YouTube.

Also, the AOSP license doesn’t grant OEMs the proper to use the Android logo and other Android related trademarks. so as to get those rights, Google requires OEMs to sign an optional, non-exclusive agreement TADA. Further, TADA requires the OEMs to be in compliance with a legitimate and effective ACC.

The regulator said it had been of the clear opinion that by making pre-installation of Google”s proprietary apps (particularly Play Store) conditional upon signing of ACC for all android devices manufactured/distributed/marketed by device manufacturers, Google has reduced the power and incentive of device manufacturers to develop and sell devices operating on alternative versions of Android like Android forks.

“… thereby limited technical or scientific development concerning goods or services to the unfairness of consumers in contravention of Section 4(2)(b) of the (Competition) Act.

“Further, ACC prevents OEMs from manufacturing/distributing/ selling the other device which operates on a competing forked Android OS ,” it noted.

The regulator has also mentioned about Google”s submissions wherein the corporate has asserted that licensing of Android OS isn’t conditional upon signing of either of the 2 agreements — TADA and ACC are optional.

“In this regard, the Commission is of the clear opinion that Google”s app store, i.e. Play Store is clear noted as a ”must have” app, within the absence of which the marketability of Android devices may get restricted. Since, the license to pre-install Play Store depends on execution of TADA and ACC between Google and OEMs, therefore, these agreements become de facto compulsory,” the order said.