9

2 comments

she suggested the ruling could lead manufacturers to sell smart devices using different versions of the Android operating system to Google's, such as Amazon's Fire OS, which she said they had been prevented from doing.

I'm all for anti-monopoly controls, but I'm confused. It was fine when Micro$oft did it, and fine for Apple phones, why is it only a problem now and only Google?
Did Google refuse to match the Micro$oft and Apple bribes?

Also, how do they demand that a foreign entity obey their laws, while at the same time encouraging that same entity to ignore local laws in other foreign countrys?

[–] BoraxJack 0 points (+0|-0)
  1. Market share I assume. Microsoft had to make separate versions of Windows for the EU so it's not only Google.

  2. International trade, the manufacturer is free to not sell their phones in the EU or make separate versions.