Home » JuicePass-Google 2-0: the Enel X app beats the technology giant (again)

JuicePass-Google 2-0: the Enel X app beats the technology giant (again)

by admin
JuicePass-Google 2-0: the Enel X app beats the technology giant (again)

In May 2021, when we told the JuicePass story, we wrote that it was “the Italian app that defeated Google in court”. Twice, we should add now.

Yes, because the Lazio Regional Administrative Court finally confirmed the maxi fine of over 100 million euros inflicted by the Antitrust on Google, Google Italia and Alphabet for abuse of a dominant position in relation to JuicePass. By rejecting their appeal, the Administrative Court ruled that the conduct carried out by the American giant of technology, which would have resulted in hindering and postpone the availability of the Enel X app within Android Autowas incorrect.

Antitrust

Europe investigates the Google-Meta agreement on online advertising: is it a monopoly?

by Emanuele Capone


In the Antitrust ruling, against which Google had just announced an appealit said that “by refusing Enel X Italia to make JuicePass available on Android Auto”, Big G would have “unfairly limited the possibilities for users to use the app when driving an electric vehicle and they need to recharge“. Obviously, Google would have done this to favor Maps.

As mentioned, the TAR considered the appeal unfounded. After underlining that “the Agcm has correctly identified the dominant position of Google through the Android operating system and through Google Play “, the judges focused on the competitive relationship between Maps and JuicePass:” It is indubitable – the ruling reads – both the partial overlap existing in current affairs between the two apps and Google’s intention to expand the functionality of Maps up to including activities that are currently possible only through apps having as their object the recharging of electric cars, which highlight the existence of a common competitive environment between the two products “.

See also  Sleep deprivation and Alzheimer's: Science finds a correlation

In short: on the subject of abuse of dominant position, the TAR held that “the provision (of the Antitrust, ed) accounted for the fact that alternative solutions for accessing the infotainment system proposed by Google were not practically feasible“And that” the Authority has acquired information from the car manufacturers, which have stated that the apps they have developed to manage the car infotainment systems are present on Android Auto, thus confirming the indispensability of this resource “.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy