The Android Auto Decision and the European Antitrust Paradox
The European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) Android Auto judgment, delivered in late February, could mark a radical shift in how courts interpret the European Union’s essential-facilities doctrine, as well as the legal standard applied to “refusal to deal” cases. My colleague Giuseppe Colangelo has a great working paper analyzing the decision and its potential consequences.
The case raises a number of important questions, including the relevant market definition (is Android Auto a monopoly?) and the theory of harm (was anyone excluded from the market? Did this affect consumers?). This post will focus on what I see as the judgment’s internal inconsistencies, and how these are likely to leave European antitrust policy confused with regard to market incentives to create, innovate, and properly maintain digital platforms (or any productive asset, for that matter).