Follow‑up to question E‑005124/2020 – the Digital Markets Act, structural remedies and compliance with the Commission’s 2018 Android decision
15.1.2021
Question for written answer E-000215/2021
to the Commission
Rule 138
Carmen Avram (S&D)
In its answer to question E‑005124/2020[1], the Commission recognised the possibility of a structural break‑up of platforms to restore fair competition and put an end to long‑lasting and discriminatory practices. The Commission stated that ‘if necessary, and as a last resort option, non-financial remedies can be imposed. These can include behavioural and structural remedies’[2].
Given that fines and behavioural remedies have failed:
- 1.Is the Commission ready to consider breaking up or unbundling a platform, not as a last resort, but rather as one of the available instruments to stop long‑lasting and repeated discriminatory practices by some actors?
- 2.Can it explain why a company that offers the best ‘free’ service in the world and the best search engine in the world and is therefore often chosen by consumers needs to pay Apple to be the default search engine for IOS (the Commission did not answer this sub‑question in its response to question E‑005124/2020)?
- 3.The Fairsearch association argues that Google should be subject to a new investigation into Android because it is not complying with the Commission’s 2018 order[3]. Google’s method for adapting its contracts and offering a choice of internet browser and search service is allowing the US tech giant to ‘perpetuate its anti‑competitive behaviour in other markets’[4]. What is the Commission’s latest position on this matter?
Last updated: 27 January 2021