Online anticompetitive practices

The experience Germany

In April 2025, two abuse of dominance rulings were issued against Google in response to complaints from map service providers (like TomTom).

The first decision concerns Google¹ Maps, which offers mapping services such as map display (3D street views), route navigation, fixing and displaying locations on the map, etc. Third-party Android app developers can integrate such services into their apps - already integrated into more than 10 million websites and mobile apps. At the same time, Google restricted the combination of Google Maps and map services from several providers (competitors of Google). Thus, developers were forbidden to:

1) Use maps, information about places on a map or other content other than that provided by Google.

2) Use services from other providers that are similar to or recreate the features of Google Maps.

3) Connect Google Maps and third-party mapping services if the application combines mapping services from different providers.

Google is recognized to be limiting the compatibility of Google Maps and competitors' mapping services.

The second proceedings relate to Google's abuses in the market of services for onboard car systems (route display screen, gesture control of services, voice assistants, etc.). Google sold a GAS package (Google Maps, Google Play and Google Assistant services) for cars to car manufacturers.

However, manufacturers could only connect the full GAS package (all 3 services), the services cannot be connected separately. For example, Google Maps can only be used with Google Play and Google Assistant.

The single GAS package also forces car manufacturers to connect the whole package without the option of linking Google services with similar services from other providers (like TomTom). In addition, Google limited the interoperability of its services with those of competitors, for example, the Google Assistant voice assistant did not interact with third-party mapping services and voice assistants.

The experience of Japan

In April 2025. The Japan Fair Trade Commission found that Google had entered into anticompetitive agreements with Android smartphone manufacturers and mobile network operators. The agreements included mandatory pre-installation of Google services.

Android smartphone manufacturers and mobile carriers could also generate some search advertising revenue if they fix Google Chrome as the default browser and don't integrate other developers' search engines.

Google must now remove the enumerated terms and conditions in the agreements, develop internal rules to ensure antitrust compliance.

The experience of India

In April 2025, the Competition² Commission of India ruled against Google for anti-competitive agreements with smart TV manufacturers. Manufacturers wishing to install the Google Play app store were required to:

1) Pre-install the full set of Google applications (Google TV Services and YouTube), which, for example, promoted YouTube and reinforced Google's dominance in the video hosting marketplace.

2) Do not use alternative versions of³ Android (forks ). This restricted the manufacturers' ability to develop and release devices on a modified Android operating system.

A settlement agreement was signed with Google to cancel these provisions, and Google must also pay a fine of about $2.4 mn.

The US experience

In April 2025, a District court in California⁴ issued an injunction against the cab hailing and food delivery app Uber One. Uber offered a paid subscription, claiming that consumers would save up to $25 per month on rides and deliveries compared to those without subscription. However, it was revealed that:

1) There is no real evidence of savings of $25 per month.

2) Uber connected users to paid subscription without warning and without consent. For example, on the checkout screen, the user was automatically flagged that the user could save money with a free trial of Uber One. And if the checkbox was unchecked, it wasn't clear what was being canceled - the order or the subscription. And after 4 weeks, Uber automatically connected to paid subscription with periodic debiting of funds.

3) Uber notifies users 48 hours before the fee is charged that they can cancel their subscription, but due to unclear instructions on how to cancel subscription, users contacted customer support, which, however, delayed responses for more than 48 hours, after which the fee was already charged.

Russia’s experience

Today in Russia, the FAS is focused on regulating dominant marketplaces. For example, by the end of March 2025, Ozon and Wildberries had to create a transparent discount mechanism⁵ for sellers. According to media reports, the FAS should also define the criteria of “large” platforms and develop special antimonopoly requirements for marketplaces, such as restrictions for large platforms in terms of priority promotion of their own goods, the amount of investment in discounts, etc., as well as to establish a transparent mechanism of discounts for sellers.

From the monitoring issue No. 4 (16), April 2025. Download the full issue (PDF) · issue page at the Gaidar Institute