Google benefits Apple, Apple pays Google Google case against US collusion, know what difference does it make to India
After Europe-America, Japan and Australia also hinted at challenging the monopoly of tech companies like Google.
Google's answer: We are not coercing anyone, people are using their own search
In the United States, the Department of Justice and 11 states have sued Google, the most widely used search engine. He has been accused of making exclusive deals with illegal Apple and smartphone makers to end the competition and monopolize it.
This is the biggest case against a technology firm in two decades. A similar case was filed against Microsoft in 1998. Such allegations have been made against Google in the past. Now news is also coming that Australia and Japan are also preparing to challenge the monopoly of big tech companies with Europe and America.
It is important to know what allegations have been made against Google in these cases. What effect can this have? Let's find the answers to these questions ...
First of all, what is the case and who did it?
“Today, millions of Americans rely on the Internet and online platforms...Competition in this industry is vitally important, which is why today’s challenge against Google...for violating antitrust laws is a monumental case both for the DOJ and for the American people.” — AG Barr pic.twitter.com/CG8UKXDtZo
— Justice Department (@TheJusticeDept) October 20, 2020
The U.S. Department of Justice and 11 different states have filed antitrust cases against Google. The 54-page complaint alleges that Google made exclusive deals to gain more than 90% market share in the search engine business. This made Google the default search engine for users on this device.
Google paid billions of dollars to mobile companies, carriers and browsers from their advertising revenue so that Google could become a pre-set search engine on their device. This put Google in a top position on millions of devices and prevented it from establishing itself for other search engines.
There are also allegations that Apple and Google backed each other and knocked their rivals out of the fray. In the US, nearly half of Google's search traffic came from Apple's iPhones, while one-fifth of Apple's profits came from Google.
Google stopped innovation. Finished the choice for users and affected the service quality like privacy data. Google took advantage of its position and did not allow other companies or startups to emerge or innovate. The Justice Department registered the case after nearly a year of investigation.
What is Google's response to the US government's allegations?
People don’t use Google because they have to -- they use it because it’s helpful. People have endless options when it comes to accessing information online, and they can switch or download alternative search engines in a matter of seconds.https://t.co/uHUzG1wz4n
— Kent Walker (@Kent_Walker) October 20, 2020
According to Kent Walker, Google's chief legal officer, the case is baseless. People use Google because they have decided to do so. Google has not forced anyone to use its services. The option is present if you want them.
According to him, the excuse of anti-trust law favors companies that cannot compete in the market. Google pays Apple and other smartphone companies to find self-space to reach as many people as possible. There is nothing wrong with that.
Walker also said that the design of the American Anti-Trust Law is not such that it provides strength to a weaker competitor. Here is an equal opportunity for all. The case will not last long in court. Whatever service Google offers to users is free. It is unreasonable to expect anyone to be harmed by it.
What is the politics behind this case?
Many questions have been raised about the timing of the case to the states involved. The case was filed just two weeks before the election. Usually there is a fear that any move will affect the election, for this reason no big step is taken by the government.
Importantly, the 11 states that have sided with the Justice Department are all Republican attorney generals. The fact is that all 50 states in the United States launched an investigation against Google a year ago.
What could be the outcome of the case?
In such cases, the hearing is lengthy and takes two to three years to reach a decision. Similar lawsuits were filed against Microsoft in 1998, which ended in a settlement.
Google has faced similar allegations in Europe before. If the company loses, it will have to make some changes in the structure of the company. This will strengthen the big tech companies if they win. This could jeopardize governments' efforts to control them.
It is decided that the outcome of the case will take time. There are elections in the United States on November 3 and the new government will have to fight this case. Democrats have long argued that the provisions of the anti-trust law need to be changed in the new digital age.
Can Google be sued in India too?
The job of the Competition Commission of India (CCI) in India is to end the monopoly of a company in the market. It promotes healthy competition. The CCI is already investigating a similar case filed in the United States.
A similar situation arose last month in the case of Paytm v. Google. When Google took advantage of its position, it removed Paytm's app from the Play Store. Even then, Paytm made the same allegation that Google discriminates between itself and other apps.
News agency Reuters reported a few days ago that the Competition Commission of India will investigate Google's grandfathering in the smart TV market. The case is about the supply of Android apps to be installed in smart TVs, which can be seen pre-installed in most of the smart TVs sold in India.
What do Indian jurists say?
Cyber Act expert and Supreme Court lawyer Virag Gupta says that if action is taken to end Google's corporate dominance in the US, it will affect India as well. Companies like Google have established their chaotic dominance in India compared to the US.
According to the Senior Advocate, India needs to make new laws and change the old ones. India currently has a number of restrictions on FDI from China and Pakistan. Similarly, tech companies also need to change the rules of Companies Act, IT Act and Income Act.
Gupta says a large amount of data is purchased from these companies. This needs to be controlled so that government revenue can be increased. To challenge the monopoly of these companies in India, the Competition Commission system needs to be streamlined.
No comments:
Post a Comment