iPhone 14 review: Not an upgrade year for most

The iPhone 14 series is at once controversial and underwhelming. With its latest phones, Apple chose to ditch the physical SIM card slot but continued to avoid adopting USB-C, and on the non-Pro models there’s still the notch. At the same time, the iPh…

iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max review: Just different enough

For years, Apple has been the lone holdout in a sea of all-screen phones with punch-hole cutouts that house selfie cameras. The black rectangle that sat at the top of its flagships since the iPhone X has drawn some criticism, but mostly ambivalence. Ap…

GoPro Hero 11 review: One change makes all the difference

These days, the idea of a camera just for “action” feels like a bit of an anachronism. In 2022 social media is king, and action is a just one subsection thereof. You only need to look at the last few GoPros, and the competition, to see that brands with…

DJI Osmo Action 3: Far more battery life, fast charging and a spiffy new mount

DJI has done another 180 on its Osmo action cam lineup. The original Osmo Action had a classic GoPro look, but then with the Action 2 (no Osmo), DJI went to an oddball modular design. It had some interesting ideas – it was nice and small, and you could…

Google fails to overturn EU Android antitrust ruling but reduces its fine by 5 percent

Google has failed to convince Europe’s General Court to overturn the Commission’s ruling on its Android antitrust case and its decision to slap the company with a €4.3 (US$4.3) billion fine. The General Court upheld the Commission’s original ruling back in 2018 that Google used its dominant position in the market to impose restrictions on manufacturers that make Android phones and tablets. It did, however, reduce the fine a bit, deciding that €4.125 (US$4.121) billion is the more appropriate amount based on its own findings.

The Commission previously found that Google acted illegally by making it mandatory for Android manufacturers to pre-install its apps and its search engine. By doing so, the Commission said that the company was able to “cement its dominant position in general internet search.” Approximately 80 percent of smart devices in Europe as of July 2018 were running Android OS, and people tend to be content with the default options they’re given.

That is a huge deal according to FairSearch, the group of organizations lobbying against Google’s search dominance and the original complainant in the case, because Google’s search engine is monetized with paid advertising. The tech giant makes most of its money from online ads — based on information from Statista, Google’s ad revenue in 2021 amounted to $209.49 billion. FairSearch also said that by making it mandatory for Android manufacturers to install its apps and search engine, Google is denying competitors the chance to compete fairly.

In addition to imposing restrictions on Android manufacturers, EU officials also found that Google “made payments to certain large manufacturers and mobile network operators” in an alleged effort to ensure that carriers only installed Google Search on the devisions they sell. The General Court has agreed with the Commission, as well, when it comes to the anti-fragmentation agreements Android manufacturers have to sign. These agreements seek to “prevent the development and market presence of devices running a non-compatible Android fork,” the court wrote in its decision. 

In a statement provided to Engadget, Google has expressed its disappointment in the court’s decision and insisted that Android has created more choices for consumers:

“We are disappointed that the Court did not annul the decision in full. Android has created more choice for everyone, not less, and supports thousands of successful businesses in Europe and around the world.”

The General Court is the EU’s second highest court. Google could still pursue a dismissal, and the case could go to the European Court of Justice.