A former executive from the venture capital segment of Samsung Electronics unveiled that an effort to augment the range of mobile app developer Branch Metrics’ software on Samsung smartphones encountered resistance, all due to Google’s intervention. This insight emerged on Thursday in a notable antitrust lawsuit against Google, a leading entity under Alphabet Inc.’s umbrella, as Reuters reported.
A roadblock in innovation
Patrick Chang, who was a part of Samsung Next — a platform dedicated to endorsing avant-garde companies — had proposed to the parent company to widen the outreach of the Branch. This software has the knack for performing searches within apps and was seen as a potential enhancement to Samsung’s line-up of Android smartphones. However, this initiative found itself in troubled waters due to Google’s sway.
In late September, Alexander Austin, who founded Branch Metrics and served as its former CEO, disclosed that his firm had to pull back on certain functionalities of its software to appease Google’s objections. This manoeuvre was crucial as Branch sought to form alliances with wireless carriers and smartphone producers. The stipulation was to ensure that searches conducted by Branch stayed within the apps without veering towards web connections, as elucidated by Austin.
A domino effect of monopolistic tendencies
The narrative didn’t end with Branch. Google’s alleged overreach reportedly extended to wireless carriers, like AT&T, who are instrumental in selling Android phones. This situation underscored a domino effect instigated by Google’s monopolistic stance in the search app arena.
Accusations have flown towards Google for spending an enormous US$10 billion annually. This hefty sum is tied to a revenue-sharing pact with titans like Samsung Electronics, wireless carriers, and others who set Google’s software as the default option, sustaining its search sector monopoly.
A correspondence from August 2020 by Samsung executive David Eun came to the fore, wherein he vented, “Google is clearly buying its way to squelch competitors.”
An examination of monopolistic practices
Under cross-examination by a lawyer for Google, Chang was queried for a different angle to Samsung’s apparent disinterest in Branch. A conjecture was that the software was deemed clunky, and the user engagement could have been more impressive, indicated by the scanty clicks on the links that Branch had to offer.
This deposition forms a chapter in an extensive trial spanning over two months, with the U.S. Justice Department endeavouring to spotlight Google’s purported abuse of its monopoly on search and a segment of search advertising. On the flip side, Google has countered these allegations, standing by the legality of its business practices.
The gaze is fixed on whether the unfolding testimonies and evidence will upset Google’s dominant position in the search app landscape.
