Google moves NCLAT against CCI order on unfair business practices

According to two people familiar with the development, besides Google smartphone makers Karbonn Mobiles and Micromax have separately filed petitions in response to the CCI’s order, on grounds that it may harm consumers indirectly through third-party software or apps that may not be as safe as Android. Further, additional costs that maybe levied by Google for licensing to mobile phone makers which would be passed on to consumers.

On 20 October, the Competition watchdog fined internet giant Google a hefty ₹1,337.76 crore for abusing its dominant position in certain markets in respect to Android mobile devices. The commission also ordered the internet giant to stop engaging in a number of unfair commercial practices.

It also directed Google to modify its conduct within a defined timeline.

“We have decided to appeal the CCI’s decision on Android as we believe it presents a major setback for our Indian users and businesses who trust Android’s security features, and potentially raising the cost of mobile devices. Android has greatly benefitted Indian users, developers, and OEMs, and powered India’s digital transformation. We look forward to making our case and remain committed to our users and partners.”Google said in a statement issued by the company’s Spokesperson on Friday.

According to the competition regulators order, it said that the makers of devices that run on Android should not be forced to pre-install Google services on their devices, It had also asked Google to provide fair access to all the stakeholders.

“Google shall not deny access to its Play Services APIs to disadvantage OEMs, app developers and its existing or potential competitors, the order held.

Based on the order the Commission opined that the markets should be allowed to compete on merits and the onus is on the dominant players, in the present case, Google that its conduct does not impinge this competition on merits. The Commission also noted that Google ensured that users continue to use its search services on mobile devices which facilitated un-interrupted growth of advertisement revenue for Google.

People familiar with the petitions filed by Karbonn Mobiles and Micromax, said that the brands have argued in interest of consumers and have not challenged the order but have provided observations that by opening up the handset ecosystem to all players, the case for unsafe third party software or apps can pose issues for consumers.

One of the people said that while Google’s Android provided regular software updates to consumers directly on their devices, a third party software may not have a similar approach. In such cases, consumers would be adversely impacted. “Today, Google does not charge for licensing, but this may change going forward, so if they charge handset makers any fee, let’s say ₹200-300, it will be a cost that will be passed on to consumers,” one of the people said, seeking anonymity since the petition is not in public domain.

A second person said that the brands had not challenged the CCI order per se, but through their petitions they’ve highlighted the issues that consumers may face. “If required, they can be made party to the case, but the petition does not seek impleadment,” the person said, also asking not to be named.

Karbonn Mobiles and Micromax Informatics executives were not immediately available for comment.