1/ I have a new piece in @NRO today with @RyanLeeHagemann arguing that, given all the billion dollar fines against American tech co’s, EU tech regulation is the real trade war (h/t @sknthla for the phrasing): nationalreview.com/2018/07/europe…
2/ The $5B fine against Google last week is only the latest in a string of sanctions. That’s why @OrrinHatch called it a “revenue grab” and @RepZoeLofgren called it a “wealth transfer.” See image for list of fines: 
3/ There is an apocryphal story that a journalist once asked infamous bank robber Willie Sutton why he robbed banks and his response was, “because that’s where the money is.”
4/ There is a similar logic at play here. The European tech industry is anemic compared to the US. The chart below from @globaldataplc is striking. Why fine US tech co’s? Because that’s where the money is.
5/ Given this context, it’s important to be precise about what Google actually did and did not require from manufacturers in its Android contracts.
6/ First, it bundled its Google Play app store with its Search and Chrome browser apps. This boils down to a superficial design requirement for OEM's and phone carriers to place a single folder icon on the home screen containing Google apps (h/t @BerinSzoka and @calebwatney).
7/ Second, it had revenue sharing agreements with some phonemakers to exclusively pre-install Google Search. This was optional and OEMs/carriers could have instead pre-installed competitors’ apps (along with Google’s). Of course, users can also always download their own apps.
8/ Third, if manufacturers pre-installed Google Apps, it barred them from selling any devices running a forked version of Android. The EC claims this was anticompetitive.
9/ But as @AuerDirk notes, Google imposes restrictions on manufacturers for good reason: if their phones deviate too much from predetermined tech specs, apps won’t run smoothly across all devices and it will be more costly to develop for fragmented Android
truthonthemarket.com/2018/07/18/why…
truthonthemarket.com/2018/07/18/why…
10/ But it still seems relevant here to point out that Amazon’s FireOS is a fork of Android w/o Chrome or Play store and it runs the second most popular tablet in the world:
11/ The funniest part of the EC’s reasoning was claiming Apple iOS and Android aren’t competitors when 89% of respondents to *their own survey* said, actually, they are.
12/ It’s also odd (h/t @HalSinger/@randypicker) that vertically integrated firms which operate closed platforms (like Apple) seem safe from antitrust liability so long as exclusivity occurs within the firm rather than with partners in the supply chain. Perverse incentive much?
14/ Anywho, you can read the full piece here: nationalreview.com/2018/07/europe…
15/ For further reading, I recommend the @bopinion editorial board piece bloomberg.com/view/articles/… and, for the best case in favor of the EC decision, @benthompson's piece stratechery.com/2018/the-europ…
16/ Lastly, I didn't see this until after the op-ed went to press, but Angela Merkel recently proposed a new data tax to specifically target American tech co's. So there's that. usa.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201805/29/WS…
