US District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed a lawsuit two individuals on non-competitive activities Google to conclude contracts with manufacturers of mobile devices Android. This follows from the text of the court’s decision. Gary Fetelson and Daniel Mackey tried to prove that Google has its uncompetitive actions indirectly affect the price increase Smartphones and inhibits the development of innovation, says the publication eWeek. Two private person also stated in court that represent the interests of consumers and others.
The plaintiffs accused Google is that it imposes on producers the mandatory fitting on Android smartphones of his search, as well as other applications. Fetelson and Daniel Mackey argue that the agreement with Google by manufacturers such as Samsung and HTC, makes it very difficult to preset on the Android device applications of other developers, including search. The text of the lawsuit states that the producers wish to establish such popular applications like video hosting YouTube app store and Google Play, were forced to install on their devices Google search as the primary. This deprives the audience of other application developers, discourages innovation and making mobile devices more expensive, according to the lawsuit.
However, these arguments were rejected by the judge Beth Freeman: According to the judge, the plaintiffs failed to establish a link between Google agreements with device manufacturers and higher prices for these devices. To antitrust investigation continued, the plaintiffs must prove that the illegal actions of Google caused them specific damage that antitrust law should have been prevented. And the plaintiffs failed to show how they are affected by the actions of Google, to the extent in which it describes the antitrust laws, said the judge in his decision.
However, the judge gave additional time to file a new complaint: they can do so within 21 days.
Last week, a similar case against Google filed in the Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service ( FAS). However, the complaint to the FAS did not come from individuals, but from the « Yandex”. The Russian company claims similar to how Google works with device manufacturers. Representatives of the « Yandex” claim that Google is forcing manufacturers of Android devices to abandon pre-service competitors. For example, last year three smartphone maker ?? Fly, Explay and Prestigio ?? one after another refused to install services « Yandex” on their devices, citing the terms of Google. If a manufacturer wants to build into their devices, such as the app store Google Play, it is one of the standard terms and conditions, c onfirmed vendors. « Yandex “wants to ensure that the list of services available to owners of devices that do not depend on what operating system installed on it. « Yandex “is also involved as a witness in the investigation of Google in Europe, which is the European Commission.
Interviewed « Gazette” retailers say that Android smartphones with services « Yandex” popular with Russian users. But their popularity is primarily due to demand for themselves gadgets due to a combination of their functional characteristics and price, rather than the fact that they have these applications, says the head of Edward Explay Vashenko. For example, Yandex Kit is pre-set to the model Explay Flame: its sales in the preset time exceeded 10,000 units per month ?? for one model of B-brand with a wide assortment close this high figure. At the same time, the presence of a specific audience Yandex Kit could be an additional motive for choosing a smartphone when comparing it with other models without presets, he said.
The representative of the « Coherent” Maria Zaikina said that the sale of the network devices with Yandex Kit ( developed « by Yandex” shell for Android) is small. However, it is not in their unpopularity, but the fact that these gadgets are sold and their relatively short range was not wide ?? for example, Explay preset was only one model. And the president of « Euroset” Alexander Malis said that there was no impact on the sales of installed applications do not have. Moreover, « customized products, usually sold worse than the others,” he concludes.