Feeds

OUCH... right in the Androids! Google hit by another antitrust sueball

This time it's about 'illegal monopoly' of mobile search

Reducing the cost and complexity of web vulnerability management

Google is facing a new antitrust class action lawsuit in the US over its "illegal monopoly" on internet and mobile search.

Consumer rights law firm Hagens Berman said in a statement that the Chocolate Factory had "financially and creatively stagnated the American market of internet and mobile search" with its alleged monopoly.

“It’s clear that Google has not achieved this monopoly through offering a better search engine, but through its strategic, anti-competitive placement, and it doesn’t take a forensic economist to see that this is evidence of market manipulation,” said Steve Berman, the attorney representing consumers.

The lawsuit is claiming that Android is furthering Google's monopoly over search by using Mobile Application Distribution Agreements to force mobile-makers to preload its own suite of applications onto devices. These deals are hampering the market and keeping the price of devices from manufacturers like Samsung and HTC artificially high, the firm said.

“Simply put, there is no lawful, pro-competitive reason for Google to condition licenses to pre-load popular Google apps like this," Berman said.

“The more use an internet or mobile search engine gets, the better it performs based on that use. Instead of finding a way to legitimately out-compete other internet and mobile search providers, they instead decided to choke off competition through this cynical, anti-consumer scheme.”

A Google spokesperson told The Reg in an emailed statement that Android had brought more competition into the market.

"Anyone can use Android without Google and anyone can use Google without Android. Since Android’s introduction, greater competition in smartphones has given consumers more choices at lower prices," they said.

The lawsuit wants to represent all US purchasers of any Android mobiles or tablets that were made under contracts that also included the preloading of Google apps. The lawyers are hoping to force Google to give up its "ill-gotten profits" and use the money to pay back customers for the money they "overpaid" on mobes and fondleslabs, it said in its court filing. ®

Security and trust: The backbone of doing business over the internet

More from The Register

next story
Phones 4u slips into administration after EE cuts ties with Brit mobe retailer
More than 5,500 jobs could be axed if rescue mission fails
JINGS! Microsoft Bing called Scots indyref RIGHT!
Redmond sporran metrics get one in the ten ring
Driving with an Apple Watch could land you with a £100 FINE
Bad news for tech-addicted fanbois behind the wheel
Murdoch to Europe: Inflict MORE PAIN on Google, please
'Platform for piracy' must be punished, or it'll kill us in FIVE YEARS
Phones 4u website DIES as wounded mobe retailer struggles to stay above water
Founder blames 'ruthless network partners' for implosion
Found inside ISIS terror chap's laptop: CELINE DION tunes
REPORT: Stash of terrorist material found in Syria Dell box
Sony says year's losses will be FOUR TIMES DEEPER than thought
Losses of more than $2 BILLION loom over troubled Japanese corp
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
WIN a very cool portable ZX Spectrum
Win a one-off portable Spectrum built by legendary hardware hacker Ben Heck
Saudi Petroleum chooses Tegile storage solution
A storage solution that addresses company growth and performance for business-critical applications of caseware archive and search along with other key operational systems.
Protecting users from Firesheep and other Sidejacking attacks with SSL
Discussing the vulnerabilities inherent in Wi-Fi networks, and how using TLS/SSL for your entire site will assure security.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.