FairSearch Europe, a lobbying group backed by a group of businesses that includes Microsoft and Nokia, has filed a formal complaint with the European Commission (EC) about the way Google bundles certain services with its Android operating system. The groups says that Google is using the "operating system as a 'Trojan Horse' to deceive partners, monopolize the mobile marketplace and control consumer data".

When it receives a formal complaint the EC is obliged to examine the matter and must then decide whether to take up the case or not. Ultimately the complaint could lead to an anti-trust investigation of Google's practises around the Android platform. This examination would be in addition to the ongoing investigation of Google's search practises, which itself was partly prompted by an earlier and separate FairSearch complaint.

FairSearch clearly believes that Google has a case to answer, but the complaint is perhaps best seen in the context of the wider struggle between the competing computing and technology ecosystems. All those are fully aware what is at stake and each will see to gain any advantage through any possible channel. 

In a press release FairSearch says that while Google may give Android away for free, manufacturers must pre-load an entire suite of Google services if they wish to include certain essential apps:

"Google achieved its dominance in the smartphone operating system market by giving Android to device makers for ‘free.’ But in reality, Android phone makers who want to include must-have Google apps such as Maps, YouTube or Play are required to pre-load an entire suite of Google mobile services and to give them prominent default placement on the phone, the complaint says. This disadvantages other providers, and puts Google’s Android in control of consumer data on a majority of smartphones shipped today.

Google’s predatory distribution of Android at below-cost makes it difficult for other providers of operating systems to recoup investments in competing with Google’s dominant mobile platform, the complaint says."

Whether there is a case to answer will largely depend on the European Commission's view of Google's business practises and to what extent it considers Google to have market dominance in the smartphone space.

The "open" nature of Android is not in question, rather it is Google's requirement that in order to achieve registration with Google (and therefore be able to use the Google brand and associated marks) a manufacturer must include a suite of apps (i.e. they can not pick and choose) and may be obliged to give them a certain placement on the phone (e.g. on the homescreen).

A more complex question is whether the ability to fork Android, as Amazon and various Chinese companies have done, mitigates against Google's dominance. More than 25% of Android devices ship without Google services and/or registration, but that whether this should inform a decision on service bundling is open to debate.

The European Commission will examine the topic carefully, but given that Joaquín Almunia, the European Commissioner responsible for competition issues, is reported as saying, in an interview with the New York Times, that his "officials had been examining the Android operating system independently of the two-year inquiry into whether Google had abused its dominance of Internet search" it seems likely than a detailed investigation will take place. However, this will not, necessarily, result in anti-trust charges against Google.

The case is reminiscent of earlier investigations by the European Commission into Microsoft's business practises around Windows, most notably the bundling of Windows Media Player, which ultimately resulted in a fine of $850 million. However, while many may remark on the irony of the situation, it will have no bearing on the outcome of the investigation into Google.