EU Tells Google To Open Up AI On Android; Google Says That's 'Unwarranted Intervention' (arstechnica.com) 50
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In January, the European Commission began an initial investigation, known as a specification proceeding, into how Google has implemented AI in the Android operating system. The results are in, and the EU says Android needs to be more open, which is not surprising. Meanwhile, Google says this amounts to "unwarranted intervention," which is equally unsurprising. Regardless of Google's characterization of the investigation, the commission may force Google to make Android AI changes this summer. This action stems from the continent's Digital Markets Act (DMA), a sweeping law that designates seven dominant technology companies as "gatekeepers" that are subject to greater regulation to ensure fair competition. Google has consistently spoken against the regulations imposed under the DMA, but it and the other gatekeepers have been subject to the law for several years now, and there's little chance the commission backs away from it.
The issue before the commission currently is the built-in advantage for Gemini on Android. When you turn on any Google-powered Android phone, Gemini is already there and gets special treatment at the system level. The European Commission is taking aim at the lack of features available to third-party AI services. The commission believes that there are too many experiences on Android that only work with Google's Gemini AI, and as a gatekeeper, Google must change that. "As we navigate the rapidly evolving landscape of AI, it is clear that interoperability is key to unlocking the full potential of these technologies," said Commission VP for Tech Sovereignty Henna Virkkunen in a statement. "These measures will open up Android devices to a wider range of AI services, so that users will have the freedom to choose the AI services that best meet their needs and values, without sacrificing functionality."
The commission does have a solid track record pushing for openness so far. Since the DMA came into force, Google has been required to make numerous changes to its business in Europe, like implementing search choice screens on Android, allowing alternative payment methods in the Play Store, and limiting data sharing across services. Now, the EU wants Google to make the Android platform more hospitable to third-party AI services. Google's objection focuses on preserving the autonomy for device makers (including Google) to customize AI services. "This unwarranted intervention would strip away that autonomy, mandate access to sensitive hardware and device permissions; unnecessarily driving up costs while undermining critical privacy and security protections for European users," said Google senior competition counsel Claire Kelly. The problem isn't that you can't install ChatGPT or Grok; it's that these chatbots don't have the same access to data and features as Gemini.
To address that imbalance, the EU is considering several requirements that would force Google to give third-party AI assistants deeper access to Android, closer to what Gemini currently enjoys. The proposed requirements include:
- Letting alternative AI tools be launched system-wide through hot words, gestures, or button presses.
- Allowing third-party assistants to see screen context when users invoke them.
- Giving non-Gemini AI tools access to local device data, with user permission, so they can generate proactive suggestions, summaries, and contextual help.
- Allowing other AI services to control installed apps and Android system features on the user's behalf.
- Ensuring third-party developers can access the necessary device hardware to run local AI models with strong performance, availability, and responsiveness.
- Requiring Google to create APIs that let outside AI providers plug into Android more deeply.
- Requiring Google to provide technical assistance to those AI providers.
- Making those APIs and support available free of charge.
The issue before the commission currently is the built-in advantage for Gemini on Android. When you turn on any Google-powered Android phone, Gemini is already there and gets special treatment at the system level. The European Commission is taking aim at the lack of features available to third-party AI services. The commission believes that there are too many experiences on Android that only work with Google's Gemini AI, and as a gatekeeper, Google must change that. "As we navigate the rapidly evolving landscape of AI, it is clear that interoperability is key to unlocking the full potential of these technologies," said Commission VP for Tech Sovereignty Henna Virkkunen in a statement. "These measures will open up Android devices to a wider range of AI services, so that users will have the freedom to choose the AI services that best meet their needs and values, without sacrificing functionality."
The commission does have a solid track record pushing for openness so far. Since the DMA came into force, Google has been required to make numerous changes to its business in Europe, like implementing search choice screens on Android, allowing alternative payment methods in the Play Store, and limiting data sharing across services. Now, the EU wants Google to make the Android platform more hospitable to third-party AI services. Google's objection focuses on preserving the autonomy for device makers (including Google) to customize AI services. "This unwarranted intervention would strip away that autonomy, mandate access to sensitive hardware and device permissions; unnecessarily driving up costs while undermining critical privacy and security protections for European users," said Google senior competition counsel Claire Kelly. The problem isn't that you can't install ChatGPT or Grok; it's that these chatbots don't have the same access to data and features as Gemini.
To address that imbalance, the EU is considering several requirements that would force Google to give third-party AI assistants deeper access to Android, closer to what Gemini currently enjoys. The proposed requirements include:
- Letting alternative AI tools be launched system-wide through hot words, gestures, or button presses.
- Allowing third-party assistants to see screen context when users invoke them.
- Giving non-Gemini AI tools access to local device data, with user permission, so they can generate proactive suggestions, summaries, and contextual help.
- Allowing other AI services to control installed apps and Android system features on the user's behalf.
- Ensuring third-party developers can access the necessary device hardware to run local AI models with strong performance, availability, and responsiveness.
- Requiring Google to create APIs that let outside AI providers plug into Android more deeply.
- Requiring Google to provide technical assistance to those AI providers.
- Making those APIs and support available free of charge.
Anti monopoly regulations are great (Score:4, Insightful)
I honestly wish US had anti-monopoly regulation that worked in a similar manner.
But also, I wish EU stopped google from locking down android in a few months. For those not in the know, google plans to do an over the air update to play services which will prevent users from installing apps from sources other than play, unless that dev pays google for the pleasure and identifies him/herself and agrees to terms.
Oh and if your app blocks ads or other "terms violations"? Google says fuck you, we own those phones and you're not installing your app on it. It's the classic "one party consents, other party also consents, but have you forgotten to ask the giant corporation for consent?" moment.
Re: Anti monopoly regulations are great (Score:3)
I hope the GrapheneOS/Motorola phone makes a great alternative to the apple/google duopoly because I am peeved at their smartphone tyranny, I will buy two of them ASAP when they make it to market
Re: (Score:2)
Very very happy with GraphenOS on an older phone right now. Some app incompatibility (so perhaps test if you have something you really need) but overall it just makes sense whether you decide to compromise by installing Google Play or not.
Re: (Score:1)
There's a technical reason for that. Pixel is the official reference phone for android OS.
Other manufacturers have things like hardware drivers they don't allow use of, making it basically impossible to install a fully functioning OS on their phones.
Re: (Score:3)
But also, I wish EU stopped google from locking down android in a few months.
You can't stop someone from doing something, you can only punish them after they have done it. I am sure the EU will clamp down on this (it's a regression from the app store debate that has been going on for a few years now) but you can't punish a company on intent. Until they actually make the change there's nothing the EU can do.
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, they love it. They have been pushing "user identification and tracking so we can find out who spoke wrongthink and punish them".
It's much harder to track people on unknown apps who's makers report to no one.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you have to always follow up an otherwise insightful conversation with your usual unsubstantiated conspiracy bullshit?
Re: (Score:1)
Because I live here, and I have been subject to "conspiracy bullshit" otherwise known as "reality".
ChatControl, DSA, etc are conspiracies, yes. But they are conspiracies that are the law of the land or being aggressively pushed to become law of the land by same politicians and bureaucrats class that is pushing to punish google here.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
They definitely can stop Google doing it. The EU has already announced that it is looking into the coming restrictions on sideloading.
However, it's not as bad as first feared. You will need to enable sideloading, and there is a 24 hour wait once you tick the box. It's to stop people being tricked into "urgently" installing an app, e.g. by someone pretending to be their bank. Once it's done you can carry on sideloading as before, with no delays.
So 24 hours, one time, per device. Not ideal but not quite the e
Re: (Score:2)
They definitely can stop Google doing it. The EU has already announced that it is looking into the coming restrictions on sideloading.
No they can't. That's not how laws work. Until Google does something in breach of the law they have breached no law. That is a simple fact. Google can say they will do something, and the EU can *advise* that it would be in breach of a law, but there is ZERO legal mechanism for enforcement on intent. They can only punish Google after the fact.
But yeah I suspect the actual implementation will be nothing like the initial freakout in the media. It literally never is.
Re: (Score:1)
Right, but in practice if the EU says "if you do this we will act", and they do it anyway... Well, it doesn't look good when it gets to court.
So I suppose you are technically right, Google could do it anyway, but only if they enjoy pain.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, but in practice this is precisely what has happened on multiple occasions. It's literally standard practice. It's a war of words, then something gets done anyway then there's a multi-year long court case over it during which the guilty party makes bank, and then ultimately gets a fine that was worth the cost breaking the law in the first place.
It has happened on several occasions in the past, in some cases directly between Google and EU.
Re: (Score:2)
If you enable sideloading, Android will also disable a bunch of "protections", some real some alleged. And bank apps and even stuff like my phone company's payment control app refuse to start if those protections are off.
At least that's what I glean from what Google said; we can't even test what they actually block until the restrictions go live.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have a citation for that? Mine was enabled from the day I got my phone and I've never had an issue.
Maybe you are thinking of rooting? That does cause the security checks that some apps demand to fail.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never heard of this before. Can you provide an example of an app that has something not function when sideloading is enabled? Name some specifics. Certainly I have a phone full of financial apps, multiple banks from multiple countries (I'm an expat), apps for share management, investments, etc. None of them have anything disabled because I happen to have sideloading turned on for a cracked version of Youtube Revanced and manually installed an old version of an Open source app because the developer refu
Re: (Score:3)
If Google says "Unwarranted Intervention", then get a court to create a warrant to allow for an anti-trust investigation.
Re: (Score:2)
But also, I wish EU stopped google from locking down android in a few months. For those not in the know, google plans to do an over the air update to play services which will prevent users from installing apps from sources other than play, unless that dev pays google for the pleasure and identifies him/herself and agrees to terms.
This is actually in response to an EU regulation: Application developers must be identified to users -with contact information. Google is held responsible for enforcing this directive on Android and via the Play Store. Their method is blunt and heavy handed... but still required by law (in some form). An optional method was for Google to sign off on alternate app stores to maintain their own developer databases (and accept the lability instead of Google). There is no restriction on apps you install dire
Re: (Score:1)
Why would the EU care about foreign companies? Why would the US retaliate against the EU promoting the interests of other US companies?
Are you under the impression SpaceX (Grok) or ChatGPT (OpenAI) are French?
M$ and Edge browser (Score:5, Insightful)
M$ is forcing Edge back into everything yet again. Where's the enforcement gone on that?
Re: (Score:2)
MS does not seem to be doing that in Europe. At least I failed to notice anything like that on my few remaining Windows installations. Is this happening in the US?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
M$ is forcing Edge back into everything yet again. Where's the enforcement gone on that?
Gone? As in past enforcement? That past enforcement was limited to bundling and choice. Users in the EU still have that. Users in the USA are irrelevant since all terms of the anti-trust settlement have since expired meaning a new round of enforcement is required over there.
At the time there was no such thing as special links that always work on Edge regardless of defaults, so this level of forcing was neither foreseen nor addressed in the original requirements which only said users needed choice of browser
Re: "I hate AI" (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't like "AI", but the situation where I have a "Choose AI" selector with "No fucking AI" and "My own local model" in addition to all CIA-sponsored chatbots is much better than the situation where I only have "Click to agree to Gemini reading all your data to use your phone" checkbox, yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Well said.
A not-Google OS (Score:3)
Google losing monopoly leverage is why it is locking-down Android OS: A tactic that didn't work in the 1980s/1990s. The question is, is Android like Windows, too big to abandon, or can a not-Google OS provide the same API?
Re: (Score:2)
It's more akin to Apple's argument that 3rd party app stores would compromise the security of their devices. Gemini has a lot of access to your device (with permission) and there is a lot of potential for abuse.
Do the same with Windows (Score:2)
Edge, Outlook, File Explorer, Start Menu, Cortana, Recall, Windows Defender, there is a litany of software and services that get bundled with Windows and are irreplaceable. You can't set a new default file manager or AI assistant, you can't set your own UI shell, there are many parts they refuse to allow you to replace.
Re: (Score:2)
Edge, Outlook, File Explorer, Start Menu, Cortana, Recall, Windows Defender, there is a litany of software and services that get bundled with Windows and are irreplaceable.
Literally everything you listed is replaceable in Windows except for Cortana (Copilot)
I use Chrome instead of Edge
I use Thunderbird instead of Outlook
I use Directory Opus instead of File Explorer
I use Classic Shell instead of the Start Menu
Recall isn't a product that has been released.
Windows Defender will automagically give way to any alternate anti-virus system that is installed.
This has zero to do with bundling. It has to do with the capability of accessing and using integrated alternatives. The closest
What about Windows? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
(sorry, I'm kidding)
Who cares what Google says? (Score:4, Interesting)
Google Says That's 'Unwarranted Intervention'
This is in Europe, where - to a much greater extent than in America - the dog wags the tail rather than the other way around. So I think that Google will end up sticking its claim where the sun doesn't shine. And if they huff and puff and bluff about withdrawing from the EU, I suspect they'll be laughed at.
It seems to me that big American companies still fail to grasp just how done the rest of the world is with American attitudes and exceptionalism.
Re: (Score:3)
Europe all seem about 'competition' but ultimately they entrench the US duopoly. They talk tough but don't want to bite the hand that feeds them.
I don't know why the EU commissioners haven't introduced their own app store yet.
if Lenovo can partner with Graphene OS... Why can't the carriers such as Orange or Telefonica launch their own de-Googled OEM phone?
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know why the EU commissioners haven't introduced their own app store yet.
The EU commission is not in the business of providing products, nor do they have a legal power to do so. The closest they can do is recommend to member nations to adopt an existing product or service as standard (as they are doing with the Wero payments system right now).
Also why would the EU commissioners run their own app store? The EU has some already. F-Droid is British (technically they were EU before the UK had their tantrum). You could use Aptoid (Portugal) or Uptodown (Spain).
if Lenovo can partner with Graphene OS... Why can't the carriers such as Orange or Telefonica launch their own de-Googled OEM phone?
Carriers don't care. Th
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly it doesn't matter where what is. This is just the general process everything always follows.
A makes a claim.
B counters the claim.
Lots of media arguments and debates.
A takes it to court.
B defends it in court even if it is indefensible, since not doing so is an admission that they knew they were wrong.
A wins.
B having "lost" is still sitting on a pile of money because the ultimate court case took years and cost less than the earnings from the practice under discussion.
The only difference is America is
Re: (Score:3)
I fully agree with this move by the EU and do rather often approve their commonsense pro-consumer legislation.
As a small-government conservative, I believe it's one of the main remits of government to counter monopoly behavior. ... At the same time, I recognize that the EU isn't nearly democratic enough, and does unfortunately stray into overregulation / wealth-farming from "naughty capitalists" who dare to be successful/don't kowtow to the EU.
NEITHER the US model nor the EU models are great.
Apple (Score:2)
Anyone know how this is playing out on Apple devices? Does Apple have its own AI too?
Fair is fair (Score:2)
They are not wrong (Score:2)
...Either of them. Both positions are true:
-Google has an unfair advantage being both the OS manufacturer and the software vendor -they inherently trust themselves not to abuse access.
-Allowing third party access will require significant effort on Google's part (for no pay), and will give third parties access to user data that is currently protected.
Google will open up access as directed, but they will delay as long as they can. When they do shit will go sideways, and Google will try to blame the EU for t