Bundling meaning

Antitrust AG proposes upholding of General Court’s €4.12bn fine on Google for Android-related abuse of dominance Advocate General Kokott has issued her opinion in Case C-738/22, Google and Alphabet v Commission, an appeal challenging the General Court’s 2022 ruling that largely confirmed the Commission’s 2018 finding that Google abused its dominant position in the Android operating system market. She recommends that the Court of Justice dismiss Google’s appeal in full, thereby maintaining the General Court’s 2022 judgment. Background On 18 July 2018, the Commission imposed a €4.34bn fine on Google for abusing its dominant position in the Android operating system market (the Commission’s 2018 decision). It concluded that, since at least 1 January 2011, Google had applied three categories of anti-competitive restrictions to mobile device manufacturers and network operators, including: Manufacturers could obtain a licence for Google’s Play Store only if they pre-install Google Search and the Chrome browser (bundling)...

Antitrust Microsoft receives SO over abusive tying of Teams The Commission has issued a statement of objections to Microsoft, outlining its preliminary view that the company abused its dominance by bundling Teams, a communications and collaboration service, with productivity applications included within its Office 365 and Microsoft 365 business suites for businesses (AT.40721 and AT.40873)...

Antitrust Commission accepts commitments offered by Microsoft in relation to abusive tying of Teams The Commission has publicly confirmed it decided to accept commitments put forward by Microsoft to tackle concerns that it had abused its dominant position by tying or bundling its communications and collaboration tool, Teams, with its business suites Office 365 and Microsoft 365. By way of context, on 27 July 2023 the Commission opened a formal antitrust investigation, following an initial complaint by Slack Technologies, which was later joined by a complaint from alfaview GmbH. In its preliminary assessment, it concluded that, since at least April 2019, Microsoft abused its dominant position in the market for SaaS productivity applications for professional use by tying Teams to its productivity applications, breaching Article 102 TFEU. To address the Commission’s competition concerns, Microsoft initially proposed a number of commitments. Between 16 May 2025 and 16 June 2025, the Commission market-tested Microsoft’s initial commitments and consulted all interested third parties to assess whether they would...

While primary infringement usually involves, in most instances, the act of reproduction, secondary infringement concerns commercially dealing in infringing copyright works. Acts of secondary infringement Secondary infringing conduct comprises: importing; possessing; selling or dealing; providing the means for making copies; permitting the use of premises for an infringing performance; and supplying apparatus for an infringing performance. Unlike primary infringers, who are strictly liable irrespective of what they knew, secondary infringers must have knowledge of the infringement. Secondary acts address those further down the 'chain'. Copyright owners may seek assistance to prevent importation and block entry of infringing copies by writing to HMRC. Where proceedings are in prospect, a claimant should write to the prospective defendant, put them on notice, and allow a reasonable period to assess and evaluate the claims advanced against them. Those in the frame for infringement will bear close scrutiny of evidence adduced of independent effort and creativity at the disclosure stage of any...

Tying and bundling Within EU competition law, tying and bundling are chiefly examined as forms of abusive dominance. Article 102(d) TFEU expressly refers to tying, describing it as requiring counterparties to accept supplementary obligations that, by their nature or according to commercial usage, are unconnected with the subject of the contract. Numerous EU investigations have flagged tying and bundling by firms holding market power (i.e., dominance). These include prominent matters in traditional goods and services, and in newer technology markets, exemplified by cases concerning Microsoft’s integration of its media player and browser with its operating system. In recent years, the free provision of digitised, internet-based products and services has increasingly been cast as anti-competitive tying or bundling, particularly in complaints aimed at Google and Meta. This trend has prompted questions over whether the established approach of competition authorities to tying and bundling is well-suited to tackling potential foreclosure concerns in emerging markets...

What is a debenture and when do you use one? Debentures feature widely in financing where the intention is to secure claims over the entirety of a company’s assets. They operate as an overarching instrument, bundling multiple forms of security across a wide spectrum of asset classes. What is a debenture? Within secured lending, a debenture is a security agreement granting interests over a broad array of the chargor’s assets as collateral, supporting either the chargor’s own liabilities or those of a third party. The term can also describe a document that creates or acknowledges indebtedness. This Practice Note examines debentures as security in the secured lending context. In particular, it addresses: the requisite formalities for a debenture the applicable legal principles the typical fixed security included in a debenture the floating security provided under a debenture how the security is perfected the enforcement of debentures and floating charges When do you use one? Use...

As offerings become more technologically advanced and include integrated systems and features, assessing whether tying or bundling might be seen as anti-competitive grows more complex. This checklist is designed to help you weigh key competition law considerations before linking or packaging products. Always seek advice from [ insert, eg the legal team ] where indicated below, and if you have any queries or concerns... 1 Products and market Evaluate whether the items proposed for a bundle or tie are genuinely separate products. Can the products being bundled or tied be treated as distinct offerings? Yes — consult [ insert, eg the legal team ], as bundling may adversely affect suppliers of stand‑alone products and thus harm competition No — [Insert comments] Do other organisations in the market use bundling and tying?...

Behaviour red flags are situations that should prompt you to probe further. Though they can be hard to spot, many scenarios can indicate the presence of anti-competitive conduct. This awareness tool highlights potential competition law warning signs, indicators, traits or behaviours to be especially alert to at all times. Even a single red flag may suggest anti-competitive conduct. 1 Cartel behaviour Any attempt to fix prices. Any attempt to engage in bid-rigging. ...

1 What is dominance? 1.1 As a general guide, a firm that persistently holds above 40% of the market on a consistent basis is usually regarded as being in a dominant position. Typically, that level must be sustained for at least two consecutive years. Yet market share alone is not decisive; a company is dominant if, to a meaningful degree, it can operate independently of rivals, customers and consumers within the relevant market, rather than being constrained by them. 1.2 An organisation in a dominant position bears a ‘special responsibility’ to avoid behaviour that harms effective competition. Failing to live up to that duty may expose the business to allegations of abusing a dominant position. Identifying what amounts to abuse is not always straightforward or clear-cut. 2 Why market dominance is a concern 2.1 Dominant firms carry a special responsibility to make sure their actions do not skew or distort competition. 2.2 Such companies should routinely review their behaviour against that responsibility and question the...