The EU has different competition laws than the US. "Google's platform or OS or ad service and if you don't like it use someone else's" isn't a defense as far as they are concerned.
You could take that 3rd paragraph, substitute a different name, and perhaps end up with the same result IMHO. "(Blank) has cemented its dominance in (blank) and shielded itself from competitive pressure by imposing anti-competitive contractual restrictions on third-party (blank)," she said. "This is illegal under EU antitrust rules."
Note that the EU says "market dominance is not illegal under EU antitrust rules. However they have a “special responsibility” not to abuse their powerful market position by restricting direct competition."
Maybe if you hope & pray enough it will happen. But I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Three words. “Dominant Market Position”
Used in all the various EU cases against Microsoft and Google. Apple doesn’t have this, especially in Europe where Android is dominant.
Monopoly of and dominance in a market are not interchangeable terms in competition law. You seem to be reading the former when the latter is being discussed. For a better explanation of what "dominance" means in EU Commission terms see here: https://www.lw.com/presentations/dominance-eu-competition-law
Of specific note is that market sales numbers may be trumped by economic value of those sales, "value vs. volume". Both are considered when discussing "dominance".
Comments
https://www.lw.com/presentations/dominance-eu-competition-law
Of specific note is that market sales numbers may be trumped by economic value of those sales, "value vs. volume". Both are considered when discussing "dominance".