Google on Friday asserted that there was no “status quo bias” at play in the user behaviour on Google Chrome, a browser that came pre-installed in Android devices, and that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) had not empirically proven the existence of such a bias to establish user behaviour for the purposes of its Android ruling.

It is quality and choice that drive downloads and usage of Google Chrome, not pre-installation-led status quo bias, Google said in its submissions to NCLAT on the fifth day of hearing in the Android case.

CCI has relied on “status quo bias” without actually gathering any data or empirical evidence to support the conclusion of its existence. In fact, Google’s evidence shows there is no status quo bias, as the tech giant’s counsel, Arun Kathpalia, submitted to NCLAT.

CCI’s Commandments

It may be recalled that as part of the CCI’s Ten Commandments (non-monetary directions) in the Android ruling, the competition watchdog had directed that OEMs should not be restrained from (a) choosing from amongst Google’s proprietary applications to be pre-installed and should not be forced to pre-install a bouquet of applications, and (b) deciding the placement of pre-installed apps on their smart devices. 

Also, Google should not restrict the uninstalling of its pre-installed apps by the users; Google should allow the users, during the initial device setup, to choose their default search engine for all search entry points. Users should have the flexibility to easily set and change the default settings in their devices in minimum steps possible, the CCI said in its directions.

“The main contention of CCI is that consumers tend to use whatever is offered to them. They don’t tend to look for alternative, largely due to lethargy. If you give them pre-installed YouTube, they won’t tend to look for alternative video streaming app to download. If you give them Gmail, they won’t download Yahoo mail or Hotmail. Therefore others don’t get equal choice.

Since apps come pre-installed and cannot be uninstalled, users are not savvy to download or change their setting to use other apps. So they continue using what is handed out to them”, a competition law expert explained .

‘Material irregularity’

However, Google on Friday to buttress its point submitted to NCLAT that millions of competing apps are getting downloaded; UC Browser has been downloaded on 79 percent of Android devices (through download or pre installation); 50% (Samsung and Vivo) have three or more competing browsers; 91% of Android have a competing browser; 85% downloads of Chrome on desktops, where Chrome is not pre-installed. Conversely, despite 100 percent pre-installation of internet explorer on desktops, its share has gone down to single digits.

“There is thus material irregularity and failure to consider evidence on record”, Google submitted to NCLAT.

On the allegation that Google is leveraging its dominance in the app store market to protect its position in the search market , Google submitted that it is incorrectly held that given pre-installation of search, no competing search app is downloaded. There is no data to prove this correlation, according to Google.

MADA

Meanwhile, on Thursday, Google had submitted before the NCLAT that its Mobile Application Distribution Agreement (MADA) does not mandate Chrome to be the default browser on the mobile devices of the OEMs. 

, Google pointed out that in 50 per cent of Android devices i.e. Samsung & Xiaomi, the default browser is of the respective OEM. Adding to this, Google stated that UC browser was downloaded on 79 per cent devices and 104.9 million times in 2020 before their ban by the Indian government. 

Google criticised CCI’s approach in using data of 2020 showing the decline of UC browser’s market share post the ban without mentioning the reason of its decline. It was argued that the decline in market share was due to the ban imposed by the Indian Government on Chinese applications and not due to any condition under its MADA.

Related Topics