However, the difficulty shortly advanced into ascertaining whether or not India’s competitors watchdog, given its lack of quorum, may take up the complaints.
ADIF’s grievance: The group, representing startups comparable to Paytm, MapmyIndia, Matrimony, TrulyMadly, wrote to the CCI thrice – on January 31, March 6 and March 28 – this 12 months urging the regulator to look into Google’s user-choice billing (UCB) coverage.
What are the allegations? ADIF alleged that by implementing UCB, Google was participating in anticompetitive conduct. As per ADIF, Google’s coverage on charging fee to app builders may “take away a huge chunk of the revenue made by Indian app developers and startups, and would render business models of many young companies unviable, especially the ones relying on in-app purchases, paid apps or subscriptions”.
What is Google’s policy: Following two orders by CCI in October last year against how Google ran its Android mobile operating system, the company had announced it was introducing around five changes to the way it operates Android and Google Play billing in India.
Among these was a step to expand user choice billing to all developers. Later in February, the company told developers they have till April 26 to comply with the new Google Play payments policy, which permits alternative billing options.
Discover the stories of your interest
What’s the new policy? Under the new policy, users would have a choice in making in-app purchases using Google’s own billing system, or through other methods like UPI, net banking, wallets, among others. However, non-Google payment options would attract 11-26% commission.Plea in Delhi High Court: After having approached the CCI thrice in three months, the ADIF filed a petition in the Delhi High Court asking the courts to order the antitrust watchdog to take up its complaints before April 26. At the root of this case was the fact that CCI has only two members since its chairperson Ashok Kumar Gupta retired in October. As per the Competition Act, a quorum of at least three members is needed for the regulator to adjudicate on antitrust matters.
The proceedings: The single-judge bench of the court ordered there was “no impediment, legal or otherwise, in directing the CCI to take up the applications” beneath the Competition Act. The order additionally famous that merely as a result of “of a defect or a vacancy in the constitution of the CCI, the CCI cannot be considered as a statutory authority not having jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaints or other proceedings pending before it”.
What’s subsequent? Even as Google has appealed the matter earlier than a division bench of the Delhi High Court, the competitors watchdog has taken the matter up and has requested the events to submit related paperwork to place forth their arguments. It is noteworthy that Google introduced within the UCB system after its obligatory deployment of Google Play Billing System (GPBS) for builders was thought of anti-competitive by the CCI. The ADIF, nonetheless, alleges that UCB is Google’s method of implementing GPBS otherwise. Google, however, has mentioned that it has “fully complied with the CCI’s order” issued in October.
Source: economictimes.indiatimes.com