Google has settled its Android TV dominance case with CCI for Rs.20.2 crore, agreeing to major policy changes. However, a CCI member strongly dissented, claiming Google’s offer fails to fix core competition issues.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has accepted a settlement proposal from tech giant Google in a case involving its alleged anti-competitive behavior related to Android TV licensing in India.
The settlement was approved by a majority of the CCI, including its Chairperson Ravneet Kaur, and includes a settlement payment of Rs.20.24 crore. Google is also required to make major changes in how it deals with smart TV manufacturers in India.
This case began back in 2020 when two lawyers, Kshitiz Arya and Purushottam Anand, filed complaints against Google. They claimed that Google was misusing its powerful position in two markets – one for licensable smart TV operating systems and another for app stores used on Android smart TVs.
The CCI, after taking note of these complaints, directed the Director General (DG) to start an investigation.
ALSO READ: 277-Page Ruling|| US Court Exposes Google’s Search Engine Manipulations
The investigation found that Google indeed holds a strong position in both these markets in India. It also found that Google used this dominant position in unfair ways. Some of the anti-competitive practices listed in the report included:
- Forcing TV makers to pre-install its full package of Google TV Services.
- Making them sign something called the Android Compatibility Commitment (ACC), which stops them from using or developing smart TVs with other versions of Android (known as forked versions).
- Linking the YouTube app with the Play Store to make sure people continue to use Google’s video platform, which gives it an unfair advantage.
In May 2024, Google filed a settlement application under the newly introduced CCI (Settlement) Regulations, 2024. Google offered a few promises in return for closing the case:
- Google said it will offer a separate “New India Agreement” for smart TV makers, allowing them to get the Google Play Store without needing to bundle other Google apps.
- It also said it will no longer force manufacturers in India to follow the ACC rules if they’re not using Google apps.
- Google will also remind manufacturers that they can use other operating systems like open-source Android, Tizen, or WebOS instead of Google’s OS.
Google also promised that it would stick to these changes for five years. During this time, it will submit annual reports to CCI to show that it is following through.
The CCI calculated the Rs.20.24 crore settlement amount by looking at Google’s earnings from Android TV-related operations in India. Google had tried to argue that revenue from YouTube and the Play Store should not be included in this, but the CCI did not agree.
A 15% discount on the final settlement amount was given under the CCI’s Settlement Regulations. Google paid this amount on April 8, 2025.
The official CCI order said,
“Google will adhere to all three settlement proposals for a period of 5 years. Google is also prepared to submit regular compliance reports to the Commission confirming that it is honoring its obligations under these settlement proposals.”
However, CCI Member Anil Agrawal strongly disagreed with the majority’s decision. He issued a dissenting opinion and said that the settlement should be “unequivocally rejected.” According to him, the proposals made by Google don’t properly address the main issues pointed out by the Director General.
One of the major problems Agrawal raised was about the presence of two agreements: the new “New India Agreement” and the old Television App Distribution Agreement (TADA). The new agreement gives manufacturers the option to get only the Play Store (without other Google apps) for a fee.
On the other hand, TADA, which is free, still requires manufacturers to agree to all of Google’s conditions, which have already been found to be problematic.
Agrawal pointed out that:
“This dual structure places OEMs in a position where opting for the New India Agreement incurs additional costs, while the bundled applications under TADA remain free but come with restrictive conditions. This arrangement is not likely to correct existing market arrangements which are based on TADA.”
He also mentioned that the TADA agreement itself was found to be anti-competitive by the DG, and Google is continuing to use it without any changes.
“The Settlement Proposal does not eliminate existing arrangements under TADA which have been prima facie found to be contravening the provisions of the Act.”
Another concern raised was the fact that Google’s proposal says nothing about how YouTube is tied to the Play Store under TADA. Google also did not clarify anything about why OEMs are still required to place a Google-specific button on the remote controls of smart TVs.
Agrawal concluded his dissenting note by saying:
“I am of the view that there must be only one agreement, with or without fee, for the licensing of Google Applications… As the Settlement Proposal does not address these issues, it fails to inspire confidence and merits unequivocal rejection.”
This case is significant because it shows how powerful tech companies can be asked to make changes to their business practices in India if found to be unfair or anti-competitive.
While the majority of the CCI has agreed to give Google a chance to fix the situation with its new commitments, Member Anil Agrawal’s strong objections suggest that not everyone is convinced Google’s changes are enough.
READ ORDER-
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Google
