Google has been fined 9 billion rupees ($113 million; £98 million) by India’s competition regulatorfor anti-competitive practises, the second such penalty in less than a week.
Google was accused by the regulator of “abusing” its dominant position in the app store by forcing app developers to use its in-app payment system.
It requested that the tech behemoth not prohibit app developers from using third-party billing or payment services.
Google said it was reviewing the allegations.
“By keeping costs low, our model has powered India’s digital transformation and expanded access for hundreds of millions of Indians,” a Google spokesperson told the BBC.
“We remain committed to our users and developers and are reviewing the decision to evaluate the next steps,” the spokesperson added.
In a 199-page order released on Tuesday, the Competition Commission of India (CCI)said that Google was implementing certain policies on its Play Store that required app developers to “exclusively” use its payments system for distributing or selling apps and in-app services.
The regulator asked Google to adopt eight remedies or operations adjustments within three months, including not restricting “app developers from using any third-party billing/payment processing services, either for in-app purchases or for purchasing apps”, according to Reuters.
“Google should ensure complete transparency in communicating with app developers and details about service fees charged,” the CCI added.
The order is the latest setback for Google, which is facing a series of anti-trust allegations in India.
Last week, the company was fined 13bn rupees ($161m; £144m) for using its Android platform to dominate the market.
The CCI said the tech giant was entering into forced agreements with players in the space to ensure that its bouquet of apps – such as Google Chrome, YouTube, Google Maps and others – were used.
The Android-relatedinquiry was started in 2019, following complaints by consumers of Android smartphones. The case is similar to the one Google faced in Europe, where regulators imposed a $5bn fine on the company for using its Android operating system to gain an unfair advantage in the market.
Google had called CCI’s decision “a major setback for Indian consumers and businesses”, adding that it will review the order and decide on the next steps.
The Indian government fined Google 13 billion rupees ($161 million; £144 million) for dominating the market with its Android platform.
The country’s competition regulator has accused Google of entering into “one-sided agreements” with smartphone manufacturers in order to keep the dominance of its apps.
It has ordered Google to “cease and desist” from such behaviour.
Google has not responded to the fine or the accusations yet.
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) said in a statement on Thursday that Google was “abusing” the licensing of its Android operating system for a range of smartphones, web searches, browsing, and video hosting services.
It said that Google was entering into forced agreements with players in the space to ensure that its bouquet of apps – such as Google Chrome, YouTube, Google Maps and others – were used.
The statement added that this practice was stifling competition and gave Google continuous access to consumer data and lucrative advertising opportunities.
The CCI has also asked Google to not force device manufacturers to pre-install its apps and that it must allow manufacturers and users to install apps of their choice during the initial device setup.
“Markets should be allowed to compete on merits and the onus is on the dominant players (in the present case, Google) that its conduct does not impinge this competition on merits,” the statement said.
Google is facing a series of anti-trust cases in India and authorities are also probing Google’s conduct in the smart TVmarket and its in-app payments system.
The Android-related inquiry was started in 2019, following complaints by consumers of Android smartphones.
The case is similar to the one Google faced in Europe, where regulators imposed a $5bn fine on the company for using its Android operating system to gain an unfair advantage in the market.
The Apple blue versus Android green messaging war isn’t about color. It is about membership and identity. All powerful brands rely on symbolic meaning drawing on universal and cultural archetypes that reflect social values. Some rule through success (Mercedes) or celebrate the hard-fought victories of warriors and heroes (Nike).
Apple is no different. They have built their brand as much on the symbolic meaning of their products as on the technology. The genius here is not the color of the messages but that Apple’s brand story shows at every turn and continually reminds us that they are different and special and, by extension, so are their customers. And like a not-so-secret handshake, when you text a friend, and it’s blue, they can tell you’re special too.
Source: Kaspars Grinvalds/Canvas Pro
Drawing a Line in the Sand
Apple has been a master of using symbols, like color, to establish emotional connections with consumers and reinforce its brand story. Order a new Apple product, and the high-quality packaging tells you something important and special is in the box.
Starting with the iconic “1984” commercial, Apple has been drawing lines in the sand between them and everyone else. Apple doesn’t sell products. They sell the most human of things: membership in a community built on creativity and freedom–where authenticity and self-expression are empowered and celebrated. They humanized technology.
Whether intentional or not, Apple’s design decisions turned Apple computers into friends, from the Happy Mac icon to user-centric design. They were happy when you turned them on. Using them made sense to regular people thanks to the graphical user interface and the mouse. They were easy to use. They made you feel good.
When something is easy to use, we feel smarter. We get more done. We feel more productive. We are happier. Positive emotions have all kinds of benefits psychologically and physiologically for the user and the brand. Positive emotions shift the brand-consumer connection from one of utility to one that becomes integrated with identity, self-efficacy, and self-esteem.
Brand Archetypes and Belonging
Apple reinforces its archetype through voice, color, and values, not product attributes. Things like screen resolution are what our rational brains use to “rationalize” our decision to let our emotions loose and buy a new iPhone. Apple is an outlaw–breaking the bonds of social convention through originality, creativity, and nonconformity.
If it is clear what Apple’s brand is, it is also clear what it is not. It is not PCs. It doesn’t matter what company is the biggest competitor because whoever they are, they are not Apple. They are not part of the in-crowd–a group that’s so superior they don’t even have to be mean about it. They just need to remind people who’s “in” and who’s not.
Think about it. We don’t ask what kind of computer you use; we ask if you are a Mac person or a PC person with all the stereotypes that difference implies. Product affiliations become part of one’s social identity.
Why Blue and Green?
Apple could have used plenty of super-ugly colors (ochre comes to mind) or with worse contrast (red). However, the point is that the color identifies a non-Mac IOS, not that it’s ugly.
Android green is the same color intensity as Apple blue. Blue is more pleasing to read as it fights less with text, but that’s not the point. Message color has become a social categorization tool used to recognize and classify others. Apple’s strategy is not just to be distinct from all “those other guys” but to provide an elevated psychological experience that is subjectively “better” and exclusive.
Green (even lime green) has mostly positive connotations in color psychology. Green is associated with things like money, nature, prosperity, health, and “go.” In most contexts, green is a positive restful, and approachable color. For example, people are more likely to be happier and spend more time shopping in green stores.
However, Blue may have hidden benefits. It is mentally soothing, creating positive emotions that can increase creativity. Also, the text lacks physical cues, so a calmer person may be less likely to overreact when the meaning of a text is unclear, late, or short. But that’s just speculation.
The point is that the important thing about Apple blue and Android green is that they are different. It marks you as “in” or “out.” Biologically and psychologically, people instinctively want to be “in.” There are probably people reveling in their greenness in protest to Apple’s blue. However, social media is full of the blue-green debate, aided by Google’s #getthemessage attempt to shame Apple to change.
Good luck with that. Apple must be very pleased with all the people who don’t want friends with green messages. Talk about social influence.
