Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Hits Back at EU Claim Over Android Abuses (bbc.com)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the he-says-she-says dept.

Google has rejected EU allegations that it abused its market dominance of its Android mobile phone operating system. "Android hasn't hurt competition, it's expanded it," said Kent Walker, general counsel of Google. From a report on BBC: The US tech firm sent its reply on Thursday to anti-trust charges issued by the EU earlier this year over the smartphone platform. The European Commission told the BBC it would carefully consider Google's response before making a decision. Mr Walker said in a blog: "The response we filed today shows how the Android ecosystem carefully balances the interests of users, developers, hardware makers and mobile operators." He said that more than 24,000 devices from over 1,300 brands ran on Android, enabling European developers to distribute their apps to over a billion people.

63 comments

  1. google is an army of organized trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    putlockers.is changed to putlockers.ch

  2. Google lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google has absolutely no interest in benefiting users. Google's whole business is turning users into products to sell to advertisers, nothing more. Google is not passive to users, it actually harms them.

    1. Re: Google lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Java sucks

    2. Re: Google lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember that one pretty awesome program that ran in java that didn't freeze up all the time?

      Neither do I. Java was horrible but it was the best option we had. A monopoly on OSs for phones makes life easier for everyone.

  3. Re:Fuck you Google by daveime · · Score: 1

    The "law" in this case being too popular?

  4. Re:Fuck you Google by Coisiche · · Score: 1

    They're sniffing around Apple as well, over dubious tax deals with Ireland.

  5. Sounds familiar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We haven't hurt competition, we've expanded it."

    Sounds like another company that put out a press release, "We are not a pyramid scam, we are the opposite. We are a dimaryp!"

    Guess what they turned out to be?

    1. Re:Sounds familiar... by Maritz · · Score: 1

      It's called a pyramid scheme. You have to pay money into a pyramid scheme.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    2. Re:Sounds familiar... by gnick · · Score: 1

      It's not a pyramid scheme - It's a multi-level-marketing opportunity! Guaranteed riches*! Ask me how!

      *Riches not guaranteed.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    3. Re:Sounds familiar... by gnick · · Score: 1

      John Oliver explains brilliantly here.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  6. Re: Fuck you Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There needs to be a limit to the power of a business? Agree? Good. Google is to powerful and must be taken apart. And not in some light way. Separate it into all its alphabet components or somehing. A bunch of them die? I don't care. Tve separation needs to be done in a way that severely restricts Google from functioning tve way it currently does. Trading user information for money from ads is destructive for society.

  7. Re:Fuck you Google by Maritz · · Score: 1

    You think google have a monopoly on smartphone OSs? lol.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  8. OK by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are there similar investigations int Google's competitors? Because they seem to have platforms that are far more closed and far more under the control of those competitors than Android ever has been.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Market share and what you do with it is the most legally important part.

    2. Re:OK by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, all of the competitors of Google that have 80% of the smartphone OS market are being investigated.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:OK by khchung · · Score: 1

      Do you know what "market dominance" means? Don't Android fan like to say Android has the majority of the smartphone market? How could *any* Android competitor, having only minority market share, abuse any market dominance?

      --
      Oliver.
    4. Re:OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are there similar investigations int Google's competitors?

      Apple doesn't sell/license their OS, so they can do what they like on their own hardware.

      Microsoft never tried to stop anyone from releasing a device based on Windows CE (their equivalent of Android AOSP) with additional pick and choosing of Microsoft technologies on top instead of going full Windows Mobile (their equivalent of Google Android back in the day). It may have been different with Windows Phone, I don't know, because hardly anyone other than MS Nokia paid any attention to it as a platform.

  9. Re: Fuck you Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can limit the power of google by not using any of their products and services.

  10. EU Bullshit by CrashNBrn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Android is the most open Operating System, except for maybe Linux - and with the push to force SystemD down everyone's throat,I'd say Android is more open than Linux. It's not that difficult to replace android components - almost all of the major device manufacturers do: Samsung, Xiaomi, etc.

    1. Re:EU Bullshit by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      Android, as deployed on real commercial, is not open at all. In fact, as deployed, it is a spyware product riddled with security holes and closed source binaries doing God knows what.

    2. Re:EU Bullshit by Ionized · · Score: 2

      as deployed.

      blame the deployers - the smartphone makers - not Google.

    3. Re:EU Bullshit by CrashNBrn · · Score: 2

      Not really. You can get root on almost all Android devices, and most manufacturers allow for unlocking the bootloader as well. I've got root on a Xiaomi phone, though I've been having some problems with the bootloader due to this model's quirks compared to their others. I know it's possible. It looks like I need to load the Chinese Dev rom first - and I haven't had time to backup, wipe, reload *again*.

    4. Re:EU Bullshit by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Try installing (or even legally acquiring) the top 10 most popular Android apps on an AOSP phone that doesn't have any of the Google services installed.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only "security hole" I know of is the one allowing users to install applications from sources of their choosing.

      The "malware" currently active had to be manually installed by the owner. Even then, it affects less than 2% of all the Android phones.

    6. Re:EU Bullshit by CrashNBrn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What for? Why would you expect Apps from the "Play Store" to work, if you aren't going to use the support services those apps need. That makes zero sense. In that case use the Xiaomi store, or the Samsung Store. Or just continue to be paranoid and have a crippled device.

    7. Re:EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is up to the application vendor. Proprietary software has always been restricted.

    8. Re:EU Bullshit by Solandri · · Score: 2

      Actually Android is Linux - it uses the Linux kernel. But yeah, I really don't understand the EU on this. Google already releases the source code for Android If anyone has a problem with Android being "closed" or restrictive, they just need to grab the source and compile their own version. Or install a version someone else has already compiled. If that's too difficult or not to their liking, then the EU should just hire someone to make an EU version. Google has already done 99% of the work, the EU just has to do the last 1% to create their own Google-free version. Just like Amazon has done with Fire OS.

      Google places no restrictions on Android - it is free (as in beer) open source. The only restriction they place is on the Google App suite (gmail, maps, calendar, etc). If you want the suite, then the Google Play store must be on the device. Unlike a competitor whose name is a fruit, you can have other stores if you want (I have both Play and the Amazon app store). If you installed Cyanogenmod, then the Google apps suite is the gapps file you downloaded and installed afterwards. It's not a necessary step if you want to use another app store, or just use Android with directly downloaded apps.

      Short of decoupling that app suite from the Play store (which would destroy Google's revenue model, since their apps are otherwise free), there's not much else Google can do to make Android any more open and free than it already is. This is kinda like if Microsoft gave Windows away for free and released its source code as open source so anyone could make their own version (which could run all Windows programs). And they also gave away the Office suite for free with the only stipulation being that you had to also install the Microsoft Store if you wanted the Office suite. You can still get your software from other stores if you want, and there are competing office suites you can use instead of Office. Then the EU filed an anti-trust suit against Microsoft because 80% of people opted to use the Office suite.

    9. Re:EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, if no apps that people ACTUALLY use can be installed without proprietary software, then it undermines Googles bullshit propaganda that Android is (1) Open and (2) has helped competition. If anything Google has locked down Android and has infected it with even more proprietary anti-user software.

      Or just continue to be paranoid and have a crippled device.

      Sounds like propaganda from proprietary software people. "Why do you need the source? Quit being so paranoid dude! Just trust us ! ". Yeah, no. I don't trust an advertising company to do the right thing when they have repeatedly shown absolute disregard for their users data and privacy.

    10. Re: EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All your points are basically on the app developers to enforce. You can literally compile your own Android version from source inspect every line of code and even build your own custom apps without including any of the Google software. This whole antitrust Android bs is coming from people that don't understand technology.

    11. Re:EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is in your claim, that Android is a Software System that is using the Linux Operating System.
      Android is not a operating system, Linux is. Hence Android can't even be a "different operating system" than Linux.

      This is the problem, that this small technical fact makes EU impossible to claim anything against Google about operating systems because Google doesn't own or control Linux.
      And that as well is a case that Android Open Source Project is the source that Google controls and that is available to anyone. Google can't do anything for AOSP as it doesn't own or control it.

      The winning element would be to tell the truth about the operating systems and the licenses and the corporate lobbied laws against Google would simply go away as they have no ground to stand!

    12. Re:EU Bullshit by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Android is the most open Operating System, except for maybe Linux - and with the push to force SystemD down everyone's throat,I'd say Android is more open than Linux. It's not that difficult to replace android components - almost all of the major device manufacturers do: Samsung, Xiaomi, etc.

      Yes, Android is open.

      However, if you want to ship Google's stuff, you have to agree to a bunch of terms and conditions. This includes having Google apps be the default, and accessible within 1 click from the Home screen.

      So if you want to ship an alternate map provider, you cannot - Google Maps must be the default and must be more easily accessed than your alternate Maps. Ditto for all the other apps you want to replace.

      And why would you do this? Because if you want the Google Play Store, well, you have to get everything else along with it. Even if you decided you wanted to write your own set of replacement apps - they must be buried and harder to access than Google's apps.

      Android is open, yes, but if you want to ship a useful Android device, well, it's a lot harder to.

    13. Re:EU Bullshit by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      We all know its running on top of SELinux. Which doesn't affect my "claim" at all.

    14. Re: EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can literally compile your own Android version from source inspect every line of code and even build your own custom apps without including any of the Google software.

      No, you can't. You have to beg for proprietary binaries before you can build anything.

      Also, you can't actually build "Android" You can build a crippled shell which google is frantically making more crippled as they abandon chunks of existing code by pumping in more proprietary bullshit. AOSP is useless without the proprietary bits. Google has made sure of that you can only call something "Android" after you include their proprietary spyware which nobody can inspect. So, Yeah. Android is the furthest you can get from open.

    15. Re: EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I am using an android phone right now. Samsung galaxy 4. Where in the OS settings do I go to access or enable root access for my phone?

      I suspect what you meant to say is that users can make the choice to try to gain root access to their phone by using a hack for which may brick their expensive portable computer.

    16. Re: EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      anyone familiar at all with IT security knows that you do not make it easy for the average user to gain root or admin access to his own system. If it is easy for you, then it is also easy for apps that you install and allow to act as you.

    17. Re:EU Bullshit by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No Android is 100% open. What you're talking about is the requirements to add Google Play services to a device.

    18. Re:EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YEAH!!!

      I can't get the top 10 most popular Android apps on my Windows phone either.

      DOWN WITH THE GOOGLE MONOPOLY

      Oh wait; you mean the 10 most popular apps for the Play store; only work with what they were designed for?

    19. Re:EU Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is also what the EU is talking about when they accuse Google of abusing its monopoly position. Android AOSP is totally open, you can go and release a device with it tomorrow without ever talking to Google. But if you want Google Services on there, then you have to make an agreement with Google, and those agreements are all or nothing - Samsung has a bit more negotiating power, which is also a problem in the fairness of such agreements, but even they have to include Google Search on the main screen by default, include all the Google apps preinstalled alongside their own ones with the same functionality, and so on.

      And the app developers are encouraged to use Google Services, as more and more functionality that should be basic OS level APIs are pushed into them, so the app ecosystem for non-Google Android devices is a fraction of what it is in Google Play.

  11. silicon or carbon, we're all the same by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    it's ethically wrong to abuse your android.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  12. The EU is Quasi Right. by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 2

    Android is the most open of the three Mobile OSes. That being said, The EU is Quasi Right. Android has a series of serious problems that need to be addressed.

    1. Per-device Roms. Android makers play Musical chipsets with Android Handsets. This is particularly true of Chinese firms like Mediatek, where the Rom has to match the CPU type (MTK6572, MTK6582, etc etc etc.)

    2. Location Services. At least on KitKat and lower, maybe some version of Lollipop. You cannot use alternate location services. This shouldn't be, and is a serious privacy concern.

    3. Root. On a device you own, you should always be able to become root. Always.

    4. Locked Bootloaders. It should not be allowed that you have Locked bootloaders onl any device you own.

    1. Re:The EU is Quasi Right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Not the fault of Google. Talk to the device manufacturers or telcos.

      2. Not the issue of Google, talk to the device manufacturers or telcos.

      3. Not the fault of Google. Talk to the device manufacturers and telcos.

      4. Not the fault of Google. Talk to the device manufacturers.

    2. Re: The EU is Quasi Right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that google IS a fucking device manufacturer.

    3. Re: The EU is Quasi Right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They designed the Nexus line and pixel phones and to my knowledge nine of the aforementioned problems exist on those platforms so what's your point?

    4. Re:The EU is Quasi Right. by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

      If one good thing could come of this, it's that locked bootloaders become illegal in the EU.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    5. Re:The EU is Quasi Right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      25% = Fail.

      Items 2 - 4 are direct results of the agreements made with Google for including their location services and DRM on the devices as part of their all or nothing package.

  13. Re: Fuck you Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you want to ban People from using Google's products? This is not a matter of people making a concious choice. In order to not use Google, you need to block all of Google's domains on all sites that use Google analytics for example. How do you propose to do that? How are you going to ensure that when I go to the library and use a computer there, Google does not log any information about me?

  14. Just like Microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft Windows didn't harm users, it benefitted users: more than 24,000 devices from over 1,300 brands ran on Windows, enabling European developers to distribute their apps to over a billion people.

    It doesn't matter if you're dumping your product at a loss, and making it impossible to compete for other players in the space, as long as you can claim "billions" of something in your response!

    Also, we've always been at war with Eastasia.

  15. I hit Google for its ads abuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?...

    Ads rob speed, security (malvertising) & privacy (tracking).

    Hosts add speed (hardcodes/adblocks), security (bad sites/poisoned dns), reliability (dns down), & anonymity (dns requestlogs/trackers) natively.

    Works vs. caps & PUSH ads.

    Avg. page = big as Doom http://www.theregister.co.uk/2... & ads = 40% of it.

    Hosts != ClarityRay blockable (vs. souled-out to admen inferior wasteful redundant slow usermode addons)

    Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus (slows you) + less security issues/complexity.

    Compliments firewalls (blocking less used IP addys vs. hosts blocking more used domains) & DNS (lightens dns load).

    Gets data via 10 security sites.

    APK

    P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/... (Verified by Malwarebytes' S. Burn "seen the code & it's safe" http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... )

  16. Re: Fuck you Google by spacepimp · · Score: 1

    Why don't you expect the same of any and all websites? In fact, ban ads and cookies altogether.

  17. Re: Fuck you Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If only we had a file that blocked domains. I'd call it a HOST file. Simple and easy. We could put the domains we want in there and have them resolve to a local address instead of the main IP.

    Impossible tho, some twit will write a program and spam slashdot with it. So it's best to not have any solution.

  18. Re: Fuck you Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called ad blocker or change your host file.

  19. 60% of Android based devices use Google's version by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Over 60% of Android-based devices use Google's version of Android. 25% use Samsung's, then there's FireOs, etc.

    I'm not sure Google has a monopoly even on ANDROID, never mind the non-Android based competitors like Apple's iOS.

    Of the top three phone makers, how many use Google's Android, rather than a completely different OS entirely or their own very different version of Android?

  20. In addition by emil · · Score: 1
    • - Google should be shipping the master kernel for all platforms, without carrier ability to block. Like RedHat, they should allow 3rd-party drivers by backporting patches into a kernel under long-term-support. All components of the master kernel should be in AOSP. This should have started with JellyBean.
    • - Android Webview is now updated from Play. This should also include Stagefright, OpenSSL/libcrypto/libssl, and libc.a. Everything in /system/lib that is NOT updated by the store should have an independent security audit to assure that it's appropriate to burn into rom.
    • - The default cipher settings for all applications should now default to the proposed-TLS 1.3 symmetric cipher set, and allow only AEAD aes/gcm and chacha/poly, with everything else denied (allow the user to open TLS1.1 ciphers with extensive warnings).
    • - Mediaserver/libstagefright must be reconfigured to chroot(/var/empty) and setuid(nobody) with open file descriptors on the media. Android's Zygote launches these components as root - this should never have happened.
    • - Android *just* enabled -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE in the last 6 months. Seriously? All available code audits and runtime code/stack protection tools should be applied yesterday.

      ...

      Android is critical communications infrastructure, and it should act like it.

  21. Total Absurdity by hackel · · Score: 2

    The notion that Google is "abusing" a "monopoly" is the most absurd accusation I've heard in a long time. The fact that Google is pouring money into an open source operating system which benefits *its own *competitors* should make this obvious to anyone. Where's the ruling for Apple, which refuses to release its source code, refuses to allow its software to run on any other hardware aside from its own, and doesn't allow any form of derivative works? Hell, they won't even allow other browser engines to run on their phones! Did Europe forget the great IE monopoly lawsuits? Come on...

    1. Re:Total Absurdity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for the EU's anti-monopoly squad and I can tell you that Apple is breaking no laws whatsoever as they are very up front about the fact that they are a walled garden to where even people who have never touched an Apple product are aware of it. Microsoft bundling their software but not making it obvious enough they could use alternatives however violates all kinds of laws hence why we gave them colossal fines.

      - Sent from my iPhone

    2. Re:Total Absurdity by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how Google investing in AOSP is benefiting Apple and Microsoft. Realistically, Google is not in competition with Samsung or other Android manufacturers.

      Google has the crosshairs on them because they may be using their market dominance to push their own products. A closer analogy is what happened with MS during the browser nonsense some years ago. Windows is still the de-facto standard OS, and was pushing IE down users throats, even going so far as making it an integral part of the OS. You could argue that Google is doing the exact same thing with Android and locking vendors into Google Play/Apps. There's no other app store that holds a candle to Googles, so manufacturers are stuck.

      It's really the same "you want to use our OS, you will have this applications on your device."

  22. Easy solution by allo · · Score: 1

    Easy solution: If the bundling really has technical reasons, they should just allow unbundling for every company, which gets the playstore to work without the other apps without sueing them. Ooops, alterantive ROMs already do this with their inofficial gapps-packages.

  23. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  24. Re: Fuck you Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you want to ban People from using Google's products?

    No. I mean exactly what I said, which was: "You can limit the power of google by not using any of their products and services."

  25. Re: Fuck you Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pity that the Microsoft corporation changed its software product "Windows" to ignore the contents of the "HOSTS" file it has. That system you describe sounds wonderful. If only it could be implemented.

  26. Why else... by matbury · · Score: 1

    ...would Google develop its walled garden if not to control it? Of course they have, do, and will abuse their position of power over developers and users to maximise their own profits and market share.

  27. Re:60% of Android based devices use Google's versi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Samsung's version is Google's version. The point EU is making is that due to the secret agreements they have, Samsung cannot release a non-Google version of Android unless they want to drop the Google version altogether. And this is what marginalizes non-Google versions like FireOS and keeps them uncompetitive.