Welcome to Lowpass! This week: Google settles an antitrust investigation in India, and Tablo’s plan to record FAST channels gets hobbled by licensing restrictions.

Exclusive interview: The story behind Google’s Android TV settlement

Earlier this week, news broke that Google struck a settlement agreement with the Competition Commission of India, ending a multi-year antitrust investigation into the terms under which the company had been licensing its Android operating system to local TV manufacturers.

The specific terms of the agreement are not public, but reports indicate significant changes: Going forward, Google effectively decouples the Play Store and Google Play Services from Android TV in the country, which means that TV manufacturers won’t have to bundle Google’s apps anymore if they want to use Android TV in India. The company is also doing away with licensing requirements that made it impossible for TV manufacturers to both ship devices using Google’s licensed Android TV software and devices using other versions of Android to Indian consumers.

Google also agreed to pay a reported $2.4 million settlement fee, and will have to adhere to the terms of the agreement for five years.

I’ve been following the dispute around Google’s TV licensing policies for a long time, and in fact was first to report about it for Protocol in early 2020. Back then, Google justified its licensing terms by saying that it wanted to prevent fragmentation in the smart TV space, but my reporting showed that these policies effectively kneecapped Amazon’s competing smart TV efforts.

Amazon’s Fire TV is essentially a forked version of Android, and Google was telling TV manufacturers that they wouldn’t be able to ship Google-licensed Android TV devices if they were also making TVs running Amazon’s operating system. What’s more, those restrictions also applied across different classes of devices. If a company made phones running Google’s Android, it was effectively barred from also making TVs running Amazon’s Fire TV OS.

My reporting made a lot of waves at the time, and was picked up by numerous other outlets from around the globe. Word made it to India as well, where two antitrust lawyers – Kshitiz Arya and Purushottam Anand – decided to launch a complaint against Google with the country’s Competition Commission. 

That case ultimately led to this week’s settlement, so I decided to get in touch with Anand and Arya and ask them about their perspective. The following is a lightly edited email interview with the two of them:

What’s your immediate response to the settlement? 

The fact that Google has entered India’s first-ever settlement under the CCI’s new Settlement Regulations is significant: It confirms that the Commission found merit in the core concerns we raised. At the same time, [there are some] important gaps — especially around the breadth and effectiveness of Google’s commitments. A settlement should not simply fast-track closure; its true measure will be real, measurable improvements in OEM freedom, developer access, and consumer choice.

Can you take me back to when you filed your complaint: What prompted your decision to get involved in this matter in the first place?

Back in early 2020, several credible international media reports revealed that Google was using its licensing agreements to block TV manufacturers from working with alternative platforms like Amazon’s Fire TV. These were not isolated allegations — they echoed patterns we had already seen in the mobile OS market. We felt that the smart TV segment in India, which was growing rapidly, deserved scrutiny under the Competition Act. Equally important was our goal to protect India’s start-up ecosystem, which relies on open, non-discriminatory access to app distribution platforms.

Some time after the probe in India got launched, Google apparently struck a deal with Amazon to allow the company's Fire TV OS on devices from companies that also make Google TV devices (and Android phones). Do you think this was in response to the probe?

We wouldn't be able to comment on this specific 'deal' since we are not privy to the arrangement. However, if what you're saying is true, it’s hard to ignore the timing. Regulatory scrutiny often compels companies to reassess and soften aggressive market practices, even informally. The purported agreement with Amazon, if it relaxes earlier restrictions, could be seen as a strategic move to reduce antitrust exposure. While we can't say definitively that it was a direct response to our case, it is consistent with the broader pattern of behavioral adjustments tech firms undertake when facing antitrust investigations.

Does the settlement only apply to TV / streaming devices, or also other device categories, e.g. VR headsets / Android XR devices?

Based on the public summary and orders, the settlement appears to be limited to the smart TV ecosystem — specifically Android TV OS and related licensing arrangements such as TADA [the TV App Distribution Agreement] and ACC [the Android Compatibility Commitment]. There is no indication that it extends to other Android-based platforms like VR headsets or XR devices. However, the principles established through this case — especially around tying, bundling, and restrictions on forks — could well be invoked in those contexts if similar practices are alleged and 'dominance' is established.

Do you think this will have an impact beyond India?

Yes — both procedurally and substantively. On one hand, this is the first test case for India’s new settlement mechanism, and how it unfolds will shape how global tech companies approach Indian antitrust enforcement. On the other hand, the issues — dominance in OS markets, suppression of forks, tying of proprietary apps — are part of a global regulatory conversation. A well-considered and transparent settlement in India could serve as a reference point for regulators in other jurisdictions exploring similar concerns in digital markets

I also asked Google for comment on the settlement, and a Google spokesperson sent me the following statement:

“Google is committed to abiding by applicable local laws in every country where we operate and are grateful to the CCI for the opportunity to engage and present our case. We also thank the CCI for instituting processes which enable constructive engagements between companies and the market, allowing for continued investment and growth.”

Update: This story was amended on 4/25 with an updated statement from Google.

Building a streaming DVR is hard. So is reinventing FAST.

Two years ago, broadcast TV giant Scripps unveiled a new version of Tablo, the DVR for cord cutters, with an interesting twist: In addition to being able to record free, over-the air broadcast television, the new Tablo is also capable of recording programming from a couple dozen free, ad-supported streaming channels (or FAST channels, as they’re known among industry insiders).

The idea was to combine broadcast and streaming in one interface, with the same recording features, to the point where it doesn’t really make a difference to consumers where any given channel comes from.

A few days ago, Scripps had to tacitly admit that this idea doesn’t fly with everyone in the media space. The company added 45 new FAST channels from Warner Bros. Discovery to its line-up, including the Bleacher Report Sports Network, CNN Originals, HBO Boxing and The Ellen Channel. It’s a high-profile line-up, but there’s one major problem: Consumers won’t be able to record any of these channels. 

What else

Trump’s tariffs hit Kickstarter campaigns hard. For Fast Company, I talked to a Kickstarter creator who is currently trying to figure out how to get $0.5M worth of board games out of China without having to pay ruinous import taxes.

Roku unveils two new streaming sticks. At a media event in New York, the company also launched two new smart home cameras and new TVs, as well as plans to bring Roku’s TV OS to projectors.

Google demos Android XR glasses. The company recently demonstrated a prototype device on stage at TED.

Gaming handheld maker Anbernic won’t ship to US anymore. The latest victim of the trade war is a Gameboy clone.

These are the 50 best-selling Quest VR games of all time. Among the Top 10: Beat Saber, Job Simulator and … Virtual Desktop?

Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses officially get live translation. The feature, which was previously only available in early access, is now coming to all of the company’s smart glasses.

YouTube turns 20, surpasses 20 billion uploads. The Google-owned video site is celebrating its anniversary by rickrolling us all.

Max adds Netflix-like paid sharing. Max subscribers can now share their account with friends and family not living in the same household if they pay an extra $7.99 per month.

That’s it

Last weekend felt like the beginning of summer in the Bay Area, and I happened to stumble upon the perfect salad for the season: California Fattoush Salad from Oakland’s own Reem Assil. Who knew adding pita chips to your salad was an option? Incredibly delicious, and an instant new favorite in our household.

Thanks for reading, have a great weekend!

And many thanks to Kochava for sponsoring this issue of Lowpass.