May it please the Court:
I propose that the requirement for phone apps to be downloaded necessarily from Google or Apple, should be prohibited in the EU based on the following grounds:
1- It gives Google excessive and unjustified information of individuals and this contravenes the right to privacy.
2- It ties in a product which the consumer wants (example a bank account but can be anything) with a product the consumer may not want (a Google account). Tying-in has long been considered an anticompetitive practice and often declared illegal. See note below.
3- Users in the EU depend on a foreign company, in this case a USA company (Google) and the company or the government of that country could stop or block the functioning of their services in the EU which would be catastrophic for the daily life and functioning in the EU. This is in fact a yield of sovereignty to the USA which should not be allowed.
Much of the same can be said about American Credit card payment services, especially #3 and #1.
Based on these points I believe the EU should take steps to counter all three of them. For starters and effective immediately Google should be forced to allow the download in the EU of apps without the need to have a Google account.
Next the EU should ensure Google operates in the EU with offices and servers in the EU which can be adequately and effectively controlled by the EU authorities. Probably require Google set up a European subsidiary very tightly controlled.
The EU should not cede sovereignty like this. Apps, banking, payments, etc should be tightly controlled by the EU and not by the USA.
China and Russia have their own systems and the EU should too. We need to stop being an American underage colony.
Of course, it won't happen. EU leaders are useless, not fit for purpose and corrupt as can be.
AI:
Linking the purchase of products—often referred to as tying—is considered an anti-competitive practice when a seller with significant market power forces buyers to purchase an unwanted product (the "tied" product) as a condition of acquiring a desired product (the "tying" product).
This practice is scrutinized under antitrust laws because it can harm competition by limiting consumer choice and preventing competitors from entering the market for the tied product.
Key Elements of Anticompetitive Tying
For a tying arrangement to be deemed illegal, it often requires the following elements:
- Two Separate Products: The tied and tying items must be distinct products, not just components of a single item.
- Coercion: The seller forces the buyer to take the second product, rather than offering it as an optional bundle.
- Market Power: The seller holds significant, dominant power in the market for the tying (first) product.
Examples of Anticompetitive Behavior
Software and Hardware: Requiring that an operating system only be purchased with a specific web browser (e.g., United States v. Microsoft).
Medical Equipment: A manufacturer of a specialized, patented machine forcing hospitals to buy their, and only their, disposable consumables.
Services: A lender making a loan conditional on the borrower purchasing insurance from a subsidiary (a violation of the Bank Holding Company Act).
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
