Umar Javeed, Sukarma Thapar, Aaqib Javeed vs. Google LLC and Ors.
[1][2][3][excessive citations] The Competition Commission of India found that Google abused its dominant position by requiring device manufacturers wishing to pre-install apps to adhere to a compatibility standard on Android.
[4][5][6] In 2018, Aaqib Javeed was briefly an intern with the Competition Commission of India, New Delhi while studying law at the University of Kashmir.
[13] Google has signed mobile application distribution agreements (MADAs) with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of Android.
[14] APIs are non-graphical user interface (GUI) services which run in background, they function as messengers that allow software to talk to software inside the system and on outside, they function as building blocks that allow number of systems, data locations and digital devices to communicate with one another in the digital network.
While signing a MADA was optional, original equipment manufacturers are stipulated to pre-install all Google's Android applications and services in order to obtain any part of GMS.
[14] Before signing a MADA, OEMs had to enter into an anti-fragmentation agreement (AFA) with Google, which prevented them from developing and marketing an Android Fork on other devices.
The unavailability of YouTube Premium ad-free services in the Indian market has a direct impact on Google's AdSense revenue.
Some of the arguments are as follows:[17] The Competition Commission of India ordered an investigation into abuse of dominance allegations against Google:[18][19] "In this regard, the Competition Commission of India is of the prima-facie opinion that the mandatory pre-installation of the entire Google Mobile Services suite under MADAs amounts to the imposition of an unfair condition on the device manufacturers and thereby in contravention of Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Act.
The plea submitted by Google that MADAs pre-installation conditions are not exclusive or exclusionary, can also be properly examined during the investigation.
[21] In July 2019, the former senior member of the Competition Commission of India told Reuters, "The developments will be watched eagerly as the case involves many intricacies and its implications will be world over".
[12] Online platforms, according to the European Commission, are software-based facilities offering two or multi-sided markets where providers and users of content, commodities, and services can meet.
[25] Online platforms, according to the German Monopolies Commission, are intermediaries that bring together multiple groups of users in order for them to interact economically or socially.
In this method, similar to Microsoft’s personal computer operating system (Windows) model, the devices will have a consistent appearance, interface and behaviour.
