The European topcoat is being squeezed in order to clarify rules regarding Big Tech interoperability requirements with an introduction to Google’s Android Auto Platform-related cases.
In 2021, the tech giant refused to integrate a third-party electric vehicle charging app created by energy company Enel X Italia with the Android Auto Platform, resulting in an anti-trust fine of 100 million euros from the Italian Competition Bureau. It was a hit. Mobile OS for use inside the car.
Google had argued that there was a need for restrictions on Enel’s apps to keep drivers from distracting.
Italian authorities have constituted abuse of dominant positions that Google’s first block from integration with Android Auto has hampered the competitiveness of other companies by squeezing its ability to attract consumers I think so. The Tuesday ruling by the EU judge (CJEU) coincides with Watchdog’s assessment.
Enel vs. Android Auto Case had already been resolved, but following Enel’s complaints Google developed a template for an electric vehicle charging app, which has since continued to use itself, but the decision of the CJEU sets the conditions for leading technology companies in the market. It will be interoperability that could have wide applicability to app makers looking to connect their products to major platforms.
Therefore, the court has determined that refusal to interoperability by companies that hold dominant market positions may be abused, such as when the platform itself is “not essential for the commercial operation of the app.” However, the verdict states that it could justify a denial. At the time of the access request “due to the fact that there is no template in the category of the app involved.” Alternatively, granting interoperability “will undermine the security or integrity of the platform.”
Requests for access, which would become technically impossible, are also good reasons for denial, the CJEU said.
If any of these exceptions do not apply, the judgment states that platform operators must meet interoperability requirements within a “reasonable and necessary” period. Depending on the circumstances, the court also said that “appropriate” financial compensation could be applied.
In the case of payment, a press release issued by the court points out that “we need to consider the development, actual costs of development, and the needs of third-party businesses that have requested rights to the business. We will provide appropriate benefits. A dominant position to gain.”
Google spokeswoman Jo Ogunleye reached out to respond to the CJEU ruling. We emailed TechCrunch a statement that the company expressed disappointment in the ruling.
Using Android Auto, Google claims to prioritize developing the features drivers need most, starting with media and messaging apps. If a user is forced to redirect finite development resources with a “request from a particular company”, it means that they will lose it.
“We’ve now launched the feature that Enel requested, but when Enel originally asked for it, it was only related to 0.04% of Italian cars. Innovation is not the demand of a particular company, but the demand for users. “We believe innovation should be driven by it, so we prioritize building the capabilities drivers need most,” the company writes. “We are disappointed with this verdict and will review it in detail,” they added.
It is also worth noting that the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) sets regional rules for interoperability requirements for large technologies in areas such as dominant messaging apps.
However, this competition regulation only applies to high-tech giants previously designated as gatekeepers by the European Commission, and only to certain Core Platform Services (CPS) that are also designated by the EU. So, Google has been appointed as a DMA gatekeeper, but Android Auto Platform is not currently a regulated CPS.
However, as this CJEU ruling highlights, interoperability requirements could still apply to the broad business interests of market leaders across the EU.