EU Orders Google to Give Rival AI Apps the Same Android Access as Gemini

[Zwhaler]

T

agreed. My concern is that the EU is focusing on equal access without giving equal weight to accountability. Not every AI provider has the same privacy standards or security track record. If Android grants deep system access to third-party AI and that access is abused, users will still hold Google responsible because it's Google's platform. Interoperability is important, but so is ensuring the company responsible for the operating system can protect its users.

This is true. Google has a different incentive to keep their AI systems up to rigorous security standards. Google and Android’s reputation is on the line as the OS provider. A third party AI system can reap all of the benefits of Android’s immense user base and established reputation while cutting corners on data protection (or outright rug pulling / scamming people) because Google and Android will share some of that reputational hit. The third party AI systems would be a lot more careful with their security if they had to spend nearly twenty years building the entire deployment foundation from scratch.

 

[one more]

Perhaps, but I can also envisage a lawsuit by Android users who have a feature they paid for removed in 12 months time. This gives Google additional pressure to cave to the EU in 12 months time if they want to avoid the lawsuit.

Do they pay to use Gemini? I thought it was a part of the Google package, just as Siri for Apple.

 

[henkie]

the question is who is actually fighting for the consumer? Does anyone believe the EU is honestly trying to help EU citizens?

Yes: thanks USB-C. Thanks not paying extra when calling from Germany to Spain or using internet on my phone. Privacy laws are a lot stricter. But in the USA, companies are allowed to bulldozer their citizens,

 

[Mr. Nice]

It’s absurd the EU thinks that’s an acceptable requirement.

It’s absurd to think that users and governments would want something like Microsoft from the ’90s all over again.

Some users don’t see the big picture!

The EU wants to become more digitally independent, and things are slowly starting to move in a direction that I—and many other EU users—approve of.

I don’t trust the two big tech companies (apple & google) that for years wouldn’t allow files to be exchanged via an open standard like Bluetooth. 🥳

But I know, of course, that some people believe this fairy tale:

The market will take care of everything. *pinocchio*

If the big tech companies don't like it, they're welcome to leave the EU, Japan, Brazil... etc.
🤣

But options are slowly running out for the big tech companies worldwide.

 

[Ad47uk]

Google said the requirements "risk undermining vital privacy and security guardrails, LOL, they are kidding? Google would not know what privacy is if it hit their CEO between the eyes, because this what you get with American companies. Some are better than others. U.S.A and privacy, don't go in the same sentence.
This is why the E.U is trying to get data stored in Euruope.


I do agree that if people want to use this A.I rubbish then they should be able to use what one they want on any platform, the same with search. I can now use any search engine on my Android phone, but on my first Android phone that was not possible, Google Only.

I also believe that Ai. should be easy to disable on any platform, not muck around with different menus and other stuff just to disable it.

 

[danieldk]

What if both Apple and Android pulled out of the EU. Let everyone there use Nokia flip phones that Brussels can regulate.

Nothing really bad would happen. You can build a pretty good Android-based OS just on top of AOSP (see e.g. GrapheneOS or LineageOS). Also, many of the device vendors that are popular in Europe (Samsung, Oppo, Nothing, etc.) are not from the US. They would switch to AOSP without Google Play Services (which might not even be a loss). Play Integrity along with Google Wallet would be ditched (quickly replaced by a Wero-based wallet), which would be a feature rather than a loss. The largest issue would be that a new app store would be needed. Samsung already has one, I'm sure that they are more than willing to license it to other vendors in this scenario (even more so if they would get, say 10%, revenue on all apps/in-app purchases).

Of course, this is never going to happen, because instantly losing being the (pretty much) default search engine, app store, maps app, etc. of ~450 million customers would be such a stupendous act that either the board or the shareholders would fire the CEO. It is more likely that they'll just not offer the AI features in the EU, which would frankly be a win to a lot of people.

 

[Ad47uk]

Nothing really bad would happen. You can build a pretty good Android-based OS just on top of AOSP (see e.g. GrapheneOS or LineageOS). Also, many of the device vendors that are popular in Europe (Samsung, Oppo, Nothing, etc.) are not from the US. They would switch to AOSP without Google Play Services (which might not even be a loss). Play Integrity along with Google Wallet would be ditched (quickly replaced by a Wero-based wallet), which would be a feature rather than a loss. The largest issue would be that a new app store would be needed. Samsung already has one, I'm sure that they are more than willing to license it to other vendors in this scenario (even more so if they would get, say 10%, revenue on all apps/in-app purchases).

Of course, this is never going to happen, because instantly losing being the (pretty much) default search engine, app store, maps app, etc. of ~450 million customers would be such a stupendous act that either the board or the shareholders would fire the CEO. It is more likely that they'll just not offer the AI features in the EU, which would frankly be a win to a lot of people.

A nice Linux based OS would be nice, not Android and yes I know Android is open source.
Also a nice Linux based computer OS would be nice, while I love my Mac, If linux had better software I would flip to it in an instant

 

[Kriss_De_Valnor]

LET THE USER DECIDE for gods sake. I’m from Germany and since the EU cancels us everything that’s fun, I guess in a short period of time we move so much backwards that we start using horses and carriages again

Very true, greetings from Poland!

 

[DickieSmith]

Do they pay to use Gemini? I thought it was a part of the Google package, just as Siri for Apple.

As in there is a feature available that was marketed to them and could legitimately be claimed by a plaintiff as a contributing factor when deciding to purchase an Android device.

Similar (albeit not identical) to the class action lawsuit filed against Apple for marketing the iPhone 16 / 16 Pro with Apple Intelligence features that failed to be delivered.

 

[nikusak]

It’s absurd to think that users and governments would want something like Microsoft from the ’90s all over again.

Some users don’t see the big picture!

The EU wants to become more digitally independent, and things are slowly starting to move in a direction that I—and many other EU users—approve of.

I don’t trust the two big tech companies (apple & google) that for years wouldn’t allow files to be exchanged via an open standard like Bluetooth. 🥳

But I know, of course, that some people believe this fairy tale:

The market will take care of everything. *pinocchio*

If the big tech companies don't like it, they're welcome to leave the EU, Japan, Brazil... etc.
🤣

But options are slowly running out for the big tech companies worldwide.

EU will never become digitally independent.

Microsoft's dominance eroded without regulation - markets did it. First, the web and Google, then mobile, which they missed and eventually failed.

For the most part, we do not need EC to dictate how consumer tech or any tech should work. Companies are much better at this than a group of tech illiterate 60 year olds with political motives.

For example, AirDrop is massively superior to anything developed by some committee. Bluetooth file transfer is horrible.

It's much easier to pull off stuff like that when you control the whole stack and you do no need to agree with 87 companies and regulatory bodies of 200 countries.

Getting AirDrop to work across all platforms would be quite tricky - especially the "my contacts only" part.

(Not sure if Google's "AirDrop" implementation has managed to pull that off)

EC has told Apple to allow third party "AirDrop" and "AirPlay" implementations embedded to the OS. Not sure if that's already possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for these third party implementations. Every TV supports AirPlay already.

 

[Xiao_Xi]

Apple would have standardized to USB-C you say? So if that was their intention, why in the hell were they so opposed to the standardization for over 12 years, and why did it take them 9 years to adopt USB-C?

Citing an article from 2023:

The road to the iPhone's USB-C port has been long, some in Brussels admit.

Alex Agius Saliba, a Maltese social democrat who led the work on the common charger file, recalls how Apple executives were "nearly laughing at us" when lawmakers brought up the issue during a visit to the iPhone manufacturer about three years ago.

"They were totally brushing us off when it comes to the common charger, not even replying to us," he told POLITICO in an interview ahead of the iPhone launch.

With Apple’s iPhone 15, the EU wins the charger war

The new iPhone will reportedly feature a charging port soon to be required in the bloc.

www.politico.eu

 

[BigQJohnson]

Citing an article from 2023:

With Apple’s iPhone 15, the EU wins the charger war

The new iPhone will reportedly feature a charging port soon to be required in the bloc.

www.politico.eu

Why would the circus leader talk to the clowns?

 

[kotaKat]

Google and Apple should both pull out of the EU.

F*ck em, they can have their weird bizarre Linux phones. Go use a Jolla phone and leave the first world alone with our iOS and Android products.

If a European can't innovate and has to buy an American product, they should accept that we built it a certain way. If they don't like it -- build one themselves.

 

[Kriss_De_Valnor]

Okay I will bite, and as I now know you love people who use AI to validate their responses, here we go:

Old people and Europeans have no idea about technology, right?

The World Wide Web: Invented in 1989 by British computer scientist Tim Berners-Lee while working at CERN in Switzerland.

The Programmable Computer: British mathematician Charles Babbage designed the first mechanical computer (the Analytical Engine) in the 1820s.

Linux: Created by Finnish student Linus Torvalds in 1991, powering 100% of the world's supercomputers and most internet servers.

ARM Architecture Software: Developed by Acorn Computers in Cambridge, UK, during the 1980s. Its instruction set now runs 99% of global smartphones.

Symbian OS: Created by a UK-based joint venture in 1998, serving as the world's dominant early smartphone operating system before Android and iOS

Python: Created by Dutch programmer Guido van Rossum in 1991. It is now the primary language for data science, AI development, and general programming.

C++: Developed by Danish computer scientist Bjarne Stroustrup in 1979 (initially as "C with Classes"). It forms the backbone of modern operating systems and video game engines.

PHP: Created by Danish-Canadian programmer Rasmus Lerdorf in 1994, running over 75% of all websites today

Electronic Code-Breaking Computer: Tommy Flowers designed the Colossus in 1943 at Bletchley Park, the world's first programmable, electronic, digital computer.

Public Key Encryption: Discovered by British intelligence (GCHQ) in the early 1970s, establishing the foundation for modern data security.

Television: Scotsman John Logie Baird demonstrated the first working television system in 1925.

The Electric Motor: Created by English scientist Michael Faraday in 1821.

World's First Mobile Network: The first commercial automated cellular network (the Nordic Mobile Telephone) was launched by a consortium of Nordic EU/European countries in 1981

Vaccines: English physician Edward Jenner pioneered the smallpox vaccine in 1798.

Penicillin: Discovered by Scottish physician Alexander Fleming in 1928.

Liquid Crystal Displays (LCD): Developed at the UK's Royal Signals and Radar Establishment in the 1970s.

Graphene: Isolated in 2004 at the University of Manchester by Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov

Good job mate but do you think Ed Miliband knows that?

 

[Abazigal]

What ever became of the famous saying:

“Apple should leave the market”?
What happened to it?
😂

Yeah, Apple could, but they probably won't. Right now, it seems they can remove features like iPhone mirroring and Siri AI while raising prices and people in the EU will still continue to buy iPhones and iPads and Macs? Ditto for any future product feature that Apple doesn't feel like it's worth their while to adhere to the DMA and ... I guess you can't really argue that Apple isn't adhering to the letter of the law here?

 

[kotaKat]

...

Old people and Europeans have no idea about technology, right?

......

Sounds like they've figured out enough stuff there they could build their own non-Google, non-Apple smartphone and its own apps and storefronts, but I guess they couldn't innovate hard enough to get enough people to buy it?

 

[tcp/ip]

So when does Google pull out of the EU?

Never, it's too big a market

 

[grist44]

agreed. My concern is that the EU is focusing on equal access without giving equal weight to accountability. Not every AI provider has the same privacy standards or security track record. If Android grants deep system access to third-party AI and that access is abused, users will still hold Google responsible because it's Google's platform. Interoperability is important, but so is ensuring the company responsible for the operating system can protect its users.

The point is that is should be for the user to choose not for apple/google to gatekeep what they think is right for the consumers. A choice is surely better than no choice. Competition can be good

 

[ArtRev]

Unpopular opinion: The EU is actually fighting a proxy war for all of us


I see a lot of people here pouring buckets of hate on the EU, but if you step back and look at the macroeconomics, the regulators are actually spot on.


Let’s be real for a second: Apple and Google’s "privacy and security" defense is largely a smokescreen. The actual problem isn't that they can't build a secure, sandboxed API layer for third-party AI to access device features. The problem is what happens if they do. If they cave in the EU and prove that a secure, interoperable API is technically possible, regulators in the US and Asia will instantly demand the exact same thing. They are stalling in Europe simply to protect their Walled Garden and global monopoly for as long as possible.


But it’s a risky game to play. Europe accounts for roughly 25% of Apple's global revenue. You can't expect users to pay 100% of the premium price for an artificially crippled device. Personally, I have an iPhone 16 Pro and a 16 Pro Max, and I’m perfectly fine sitting out the next 2-3 upgrade cycles until this resolves. I’m not in the vanguard here—there is a massive crowd of professionals and tech-aware users doing exactly the same thing. Good luck to the shareholders waiting for that massive hardware "supercycle" when a quarter of the market refuses to upgrade.


Ultimately, whatever the EU manages to force out of Apple and Google in this dispute will eventually benefit other markets globally. We've seen this exact "Brussels effect" happen before in other disputes over digital markets, streaming, and standardization. The EU is basically taking the first punch, but the resulting interoperability will eventually become the global standard.


Reading through these pages, I am left with a rather sad realization about the current state of our self-preservation instinct as consumers.

It is truly fascinating—and somewhat alarming—to see how many users here harbor a deep distrust of elected institutions and regulators, yet place absolute, blind faith in massive corporations whose sole statutory purpose is to generate profit from their ecosystems.

Let’s be clear: the narrative that these tech giants are fighting the EU strictly to "protect user privacy and security" has almost nothing to do with actual technology or engineering capability. It is a corporate smokescreen. They are not protecting your data from bad actors; they are protecting their exclusive right to control, gatekeep, and ultimately monetize your digital life.

The EU’s actions are simply an attempt to dismantle this artificial advantage and level the playing field so that the market actually functions. The aggressive corporate pushback we are seeing is about protecting profit margins and maintaining a walled garden, full stop.

When I see consumers passionately defending the very corporations that are actively limiting their choices and locking them into a digital Stockholm syndrome, I am reminded of the famous line from Nikolai Gogol's play The Government Inspector:

"What are you laughing at? You are laughing at yourselves!"

 

[pelowj]

I find it interesting how many Americans on here constantly berate the EU for protecting consumer choice, and by extension capitalism itself. Capitalism doesn't work without fair market access, and allowing gatekeepers like Google and Apple to stifle competition is about as anti-free-market as it gets.

There's no issue with Apple or Google offering AI features, and nobody is asking them not to. The issue is that they should be building on the same APIs they make available to everyone else. Giving themselves privileged access that rivals can't get is textbook abuse.

The US has similar laws on the books, but there's no enforcement. When the same firms are pouring money into lobbying and campaign donations, and regulators walk straight into industry jobs the moment they leave office, you don't get enforcement, you get a protection racket.

 

[steggerwoof]

Good job mate but do you think Ed Miliband knows that?

Honestly, I fear the damage that guy is going to do to the UK.

 

[mrochester]

Unpopular opinion: The EU is actually fighting a proxy war for all of us


I see a lot of people here pouring buckets of hate on the EU, but if you step back and look at the macroeconomics, the regulators are actually spot on.


Let’s be real for a second: Apple and Google’s "privacy and security" defense is largely a smokescreen. The actual problem isn't that they can't build a secure, sandboxed API layer for third-party AI to access device features. The problem is what happens if they do. If they cave in the EU and prove that a secure, interoperable API is technically possible, regulators in the US and Asia will instantly demand the exact same thing. They are stalling in Europe simply to protect their Walled Garden and global monopoly for as long as possible.


But it’s a risky game to play. Europe accounts for roughly 25% of Apple's global revenue. You can't expect users to pay 100% of the premium price for an artificially crippled device. Personally, I have an iPhone 16 Pro and a 16 Pro Max, and I’m perfectly fine sitting out the next 2-3 upgrade cycles until this resolves. I’m not in the vanguard here—there is a massive crowd of professionals and tech-aware users doing exactly the same thing. Good luck to the shareholders waiting for that massive hardware "supercycle" when a quarter of the market refuses to upgrade.


Ultimately, whatever the EU manages to force out of Apple and Google in this dispute will eventually benefit other markets globally. We've seen this exact "Brussels effect" happen before in other disputes over digital markets, streaming, and standardization. The EU is basically taking the first punch, but the resulting interoperability will eventually become the global standard.

Apple want to build exactly that. The trouble is the EU rejected apples proposal.

Apple did not simply withdraw from the EU market. Over the months before WWDC, the company put forward multiple technical architectures intended to resolve the interoperability problem without, in its view, turning every iPhone into an open-access system for any AI provider.

The most developed was a framework called the Trusted System Agent — a software intermediary that would broker third-party assistants' access to the same iPhone capabilities Siri AI uses. Instead of giving rival AI systems a direct connection to messages, files, and app controls, the Trusted System Agent would have acted as a gatekeeper, mediating access, enforcing user consent flows, and limiting what any single assistant could do autonomously. Apple also proposed a phased rollout: launch Siri AI for EU users immediately, then gradually deploy the Trusted System Agent over 18 months so competing assistants could reach the same capability level safely.

The European Commission rejected both proposals. According to Apple, the Commission did not accept any of the solutions put forward over several months and did not offer alternatives. Apple's statement characterized the Commission's position as requiring that any AI system receive "nearly unlimited access" to a user's device — including the ability to read and send messages, make purchases, access files, and execute actions across any installed app, without requiring ongoing user consent or visibility. The Commission has not issued a public statement in direct response to the WWDC announcement as of June 9, 2026, and a spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment outside business hours on June 8.

 

[one more]

As in there is a feature available that was marketed to them and could legitimately be claimed by a plaintiff as a contributing factor when deciding to purchase an Android device.

Similar (albeit not identical) to the class action lawsuit filed against Apple for marketing the iPhone 16 / 16 Pro with Apple Intelligence features that failed to be delivered.

This might not be a good precedent, as Apple actively advertised Apple Intelligence features, building up expectations and thus facilitating extra sales of their new hardware, and failed to deliver. That is, nobody could have access to the features advertised, which amounts to false advertising.

Google, on the contrary, has a working service (Gemini) and, if the EC (the third party) force them to open it up and Google say, “Sorry, we just cannot!”, how is this Google’s fault?

But once again, this Apple + Google vs the EC situation should be resolved quite soon, I suppose.

 

[Ax1sNXS]

I don’t see anyone complaining about Apple / Google because of apps on alternative app stores available in the eu. If user decides to use some shady ai - that’s on them. They could probably do that with jailbreak too. Your whole speech is based on some bizarre assumptions.

The "assumption" has a pretty solid track record in the real world. The average non-nerd/non-tech person—the kind of person who'd never voluntarily spend time on a forum like this—isn't filing bug reports with random developers or questioning their own setup. They blame Apple or Google, because that's who sold them the phone.

Exhibit A: the EU deciding the solution to not being able to outcompete American tech is to regulate it into submission. Colonizers gonna colonize—apparently now it's technology instead of territory.

 

[Ax1sNXS]

true.

What's also true is companies want access to markets (rewards) without dealing with any of the negative externalities

Both sides are stupid and bad for civilization.

Two things can be true at once. This is also why EU should be investing in homegrown technology so there can be a fully developed option (EU third party mobile OS) with EU users in mind…. But we know that’s not their goal.