The Superior Court of Europe has weighed to clarify the rules concerning the requirements of interoperability on Big Tech in a reference in a case linked to the Android Android platform of Google.
In 2021, the technology giant was struck by an antitrust fine of 100 million euros by the Italian competition authority to refuse to leave a third -party car loading application manufactured by the company Energy Enel X Italia Integrate into its Android Auto platform, a version of its version of its version of its version of its mobile OS for use in the car.
Google had claimed that the restrictions on the application of Enel were necessary to ensure that drivers were not distracted – although the company granted interoperability for its Android Auto platform to thousands of others Applications.
The Italian authority considered that the Google initial block on Enel to integrate into Android Auto has been an abuse of a dominant position which has harmed the competitiveness of the other company by dispatch its ability to attract consumers. Tuesday’s decision by the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) aligns with the assessment of the guard dog, because the Court said that a refusal of interoperability in a context of position of the dominant market may constitute Antitrust abuses.
While the case of Enel vs Android Auto had already been resolved – after the complaint of Enel, Google developed a model for electric car loading applications of which it was then useful – the CJEU judgment defines conditions for Giants of market leading technology when it comes when it comes to giants of the leading technology on the market in the event of leaders in interoperability which could have a wider applicability for them Application manufacturers seeking to connect their goods to key platforms.
Thus, while the court concluded that a refusal of interoperability by a company which occupies a dominant market position can be abusive-including when the platform itself is “not essential for the commercial functioning of “Application” – The judgment indicates that a refusal can be justified “by the fact that there is no model for the category of applications concerned” at the time of the access request; Or when the granting of interoperability “would compromise the safety or integrity of the platform”.
A request for access which would be technically impossible is also an appropriate reason for refusal, said the CJEU.
If none of these exceptions applies, the decision stipulates that the operator of the platform must meet the interoperability request within a “reasonable and necessary” time. Depending on the circumstances, the court also said that a “appropriate” financial reward may apply.
In the case of any payment, the press release Emitted by the court notes that “it is necessary to take into account the needs of the third -party company which required this development, the real cost of development and the law of the company in a dominant position to draw an appropriate advantage. “”
Reunited to the CJEU’s decision, Google spokesperson Jo Ogunleye sent Techcrunch a statement in which the company expressed its disappointment with the decision.
With Android Auto, Google claims that it has prioritized development features that drivers need the most, starting with the media and messaging applications – which implies that users will lose if it is forced to redirect resources finished development to “specific demands for companies”.
“While we have now spear The functionality requested that Enel, it was only relevant for 0.04% of cars in Italy when Enel originally asked for it. We favor the construction of the features that engines most need because we think that innovation should be motivated by the demand of users, and not on the demands of specific companies, ”wrote the company. “We are disappointed with this decision and we will now pass it in detail,” they added.
It should be noted that the European Union (DMA) digital market law also defines the regional rules for interoperability requirements on major technologies in areas such as dominant messaging applications.
However, this ex ante competition regulations only apply to technology giants who have already been designated as a so-called guardian of the European Commission, and also only to the specific basic platform services (CPS ) that they operate that the EU also designates. Thus, although Google was named Gatekeeper DMA, its Android Auto platform is not currently a regulated CPS.
But, as this CJEU decision points out, interoperability requirements can always apply to the broader commercial interests of market managers across the EU.
