Yazılar

Australian Court Partly Rules Against Apple and Google in Epic Games Antitrust Case

/in /tarafından

An Australian federal court has ruled that Apple’s App Store and Google’s Android app marketplace engage in uncompetitive practices, handing Epic Games a partial victory in its long-running legal battle against the tech giants.

The 2,000-page judgment, not yet publicly released, found that Apple and Google’s app stores lacked safeguards against anti-competitive behavior. However, the court also determined that the companies had not intentionally violated the law, local media reported.

Epic Games argued that both Apple and Google charged excessive fees for app downloads and in-app purchases while blocking users from installing alternative app stores. In response to the ruling, Epic said on X that the decision confirmed the companies “abuse their control over app distribution and in-app payments to limit competition.” The company also announced that Fortnite and the Epic Games Store would soon be available on iOS devices in Australia, calling it a win for both developers and consumers.

Apple welcomed the court’s dismissal of some of Epic’s claims but expressed strong disagreement with the findings on competition, maintaining that it faces “fierce competition in every market where we operate.” Google similarly said it would review the full judgment but disagreed with the court’s characterization of its billing practices and certain historical partnerships.

The ruling adds to Epic Games’ global campaign challenging the dominance of app distribution systems controlled by Apple and Google, which has included high-profile cases in the United States and Europe.

EU Antitrust Complaint Filed Against Google Over AI Overviews by Independent Publishers

/in /tarafından

A coalition of independent publishers has lodged an antitrust complaint with the European Commission, accusing Alphabet’s Google of abusing its dominance in online search through its AI-generated “AI Overviews” feature, which summarizes web content atop search results.

Summary:

  • The Complaint:
    The Independent Publishers Alliance, along with groups like the Movement for an Open Web and Foxglove Legal Community Interest Company, claim Google’s AI Overviews harm publishers by reducing traffic, readership, and revenue. These AI summaries appear above traditional search links in over 100 countries and started displaying ads last May.

  • Allegations:

    • Google is accused of misusing publishers’ original content without consent by feeding it into AI models that generate these summaries.

    • Google’s placement of AI Overviews at the top of search results allegedly disadvantages original publisher content, lowering their visibility.

    • Publishers cannot opt out of having their content used for AI training or summaries without also losing presence in Google Search results.

  • Legal Action and Requests:
    The publishers have asked the European Commission for an interim measure to prevent what they describe as “irreparable harm” to their businesses and competition in the news sector. Similar complaints have also been filed with the UK Competition and Markets Authority.

  • Google’s Response:
    Google argues it drives billions of clicks to websites daily and that new AI features in Search offer more discovery opportunities for content providers. It also disputes claims about traffic loss, attributing fluctuations to other factors like seasonal trends and search algorithm updates.

  • Broader Context:
    This EU complaint echoes a recent U.S. lawsuit by an educational technology company alleging that AI Overviews decrease demand for original content, causing drops in visitors and subscriptions.

  • Significance:
    The case raises important questions about the balance between AI innovation in search and the sustainability of independent journalism and publisher rights in the digital economy.

Google Faces Setback as EU Court Adviser Supports Antitrust Regulators

/in /tarafından

Alphabet’s Google encountered a potential setback on Thursday after an adviser to Europe’s highest court sided with EU antitrust regulators over a landmark €4.34 billion ($4.98 billion) fine imposed seven years ago.

The European Commission ruled in 2018 that Google had abused its dominant position by using its Android mobile operating system to block competitors. While a lower court upheld the ruling in 2022, it slightly reduced the fine to €4.1 billion. Google subsequently appealed to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

Juliane Kokott, Advocate-General at the Luxembourg-based CJEU, issued a non-binding opinion recommending the court reject Google’s appeal and confirm the reduced fine. Kokott stated, “The legal arguments put forward by Google are ineffective.”

She dismissed Google’s claim that regulators should assess the situation by comparing Google with a hypothetical, equally efficient competitor. Kokott explained, “Google held a dominant position in several markets of the Android ecosystem and thus benefited from network effects that enabled it to ensure that users used Google Search.”

Judges typically follow the Advocate-General’s opinion in about 80% of cases. A final ruling is expected in the coming months.

Google responded by emphasizing Android’s role in creating choice and supporting businesses globally, expressing disappointment with the opinion. A spokesperson said, “If followed by the Court, [the opinion] would discourage investment in open platforms and harm Android users, partners, and app developers.”

The regulators’ investigation found Google had imposed illegal practices dating back to 2011, including requiring manufacturers to pre-install Google Search and Chrome browser alongside Google Play on Android devices. Google also paid manufacturers to pre-install only Google Search and prevented the use of rival Android systems.

Google’s Android runs on approximately 73% of the world’s smartphones, according to Statcounter.

This fine is part of a broader enforcement effort against Google, which has amassed €8.25 billion in penalties across three antitrust cases over the past decade, with additional investigations ongoing.

Case Reference: C-738/22 P Google and Alphabet v Commission