CCI Approves Google’s Settlement Proposal in Android TV Case

1. The Competition Commission of India (Commission), in terms of Section 48A (3) of the Competition Act, 2002 (the 'Act'), and the Competition Commission of India (Settlement) Regulations, 2024 (‘Settlement Regulations’), vide majority order, has agreed to the Settlement Proposal of Google in the Android TV case.

2. The case originated from the Information filed by two individuals, namely Mr. Kshitiz Arya and Mr. Purushottam Anand under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act, 2002 against Google LLC, Google India Private Limited, Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited and TCL India Holding Private Limited for alleged contravention of various provisions of the Act. 

3. The gist of the allegation was that Google misused its dominant position by enforcing restrictive agreements on OEMs, including compulsory bundling of the Play Store with Android TV OS and preventing the use or creation of rival forked Android versions through its Anti-Fragmentation Agreements. These practices allegedly blocked market access, curbed competition, and placed unrelated obligations on Original Equipment Manufacturers (‘OEMs’), ultimately stifling innovation and violating provisions of Section 4 of the Act.

4. The Commission formed a prima facie view that Google has contravened various provisions of Sections 3(4) and 4 of the Act and directed the DG to cause an investigation to be made under the provisions of Section 26(1) of the Act.

5. The investigation concluded that Android Smart TV OS has a dominant position in the relevant market of ‘licensable Smart TV device operating system in India’ and Google Play Store is in a dominant position in the ‘Market for App Store for Android Smart TV OS in India’. It found that Google's agreements—Television App Distribution Agreement (‘TADA’) and Android Compatibility Commitments (‘ACC’)—executed together, imposed unfair terms by requiring the pre-installation of its full app bundle Google TV Services, preventing OEMs from developing or using Android forks, and hindering innovation. These agreements extended across entire device portfolios and included the tying of services like YouTube with the Play Store, strengthening Google's market dominance and breaching several provisions of Section 4 of the Act. The allegation of refusal to deal and exclusive supply under Section 3(4) was not substantiated.

6. Google filed a Settlement Application under Section 48A of the Act, read with the Settlement Regulations. The Commission invited objections and suggestions in terms of regulation 5 of the Settlement Regulations on the settlement proposal from 45 concerned parties. The Commission considered the settlement proposal and observed that under the "New India Agreement," Google will provide a standalone license for the Play Store and Play Services for Android smart TVs in India, thereby removing the requirement to bundle these services or impose default placement conditions. Additionally, by waiving the need for a valid ACC for devices shipped into India that do not include Google apps, OEMs can now sell and develop incompatible Android devices without violating the TADA.

7. Consequently, considering the material on record and the assessment of the Settlement Proposal after taking into consideration the nature, gravity, and impact of the contraventions, the Commission agrees to the proposal for settlement in terms of Section 48A (3) of the Act and the Settlement Regulations. The Final Settlement Amount, after applying a Settlement Discount of 15%, is Rs. 20.24 crore.

8. A copy of the public version of the order passed is available on the CCI website at https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/orders/details/1182/0.