International News: Google’s Influence on Samsung’s App Expansion Decision

In a landmark antitrust trial against Google, a former executive from Samsung Electronics’ venture capital arm, Patrick Chang, revealed how Google’s influence significantly prevented Samsung from expanding the offerings of mobile app developer Branch Metrics’ software on its Android smartphones. This testimony sheds light on the complex competition dynamics in the tech industry and the challenges companies face when dealing with dominant players like Google.

The Role of Branch Metrics

International news says that Branch Metrics, a mobile app developer, offers software that allows users to search within apps. This capability is valuable for enhancing user experience and making apps more user-friendly. Patrick Chang, who worked at Samsung Next, believed integrating Branch Metrics’ software into Samsung smartphones could benefit users significantly.

Google’s Opposition

However, Chang’s proposal to expand Branch Metrics’ software faced strong pushback due to pressure from Google. As the Android operating system owner, Google wields considerable influence over smartphone manufacturers like Samsung. Google expressed concerns about the potential expansion, as it could disrupt its dominant position in the mobile search market.

Branch Metrics’ Concessions

Branch Metrics’ founder and former CEO, Alexander Austin, testified that his company made concessions to address Google’s complaints. To maintain its relationships with wireless carriers and smartphone makers, Branch Metrics modified its software, ensuring that searches conducted within apps remained isolated and did not link to the web. This strategic move aimed to alleviate Google’s concerns and avoid further confrontations.

Resistance from Wireless Carriers

Breaking News: The challenges continued after Google’s opposition. Wireless carriers, such as AT&T, which sell Android phones, also posed resistance to Samsung’s plans to expand Branch Metrics’ software. These carriers play a crucial role in the distribution of Android-based devices, and their objections could impact Samsung’s relationships and sales channels.

Google’s Alleged Monopoly

One of the central allegations in the antitrust trial against Google is that the tech giant pays substantial sums, estimated at $10 billion annually, through revenue-sharing agreements to smartphone makers, including Samsung Electronics and wireless carriers. These agreements require these companies to maintain Google’s search market monopoly effectively.

Email Evidence

During the trial, the Justice Department presented evidence that highlighted concerns within Samsung regarding Google’s practices. An email from Samsung executive David Eun in August 2020 expressed frustration, stating, “Google is clearly buying its way to squelch competitors.” This email underscores the perception that Google utilizes financial incentives to stifle competition in the industry.

Challenging Google’s Influence

Under cross-examination by an attorney representing Google, Patrick Chang faced questions about the quality and user engagement of Branch Metrics’ software. The attorney suggested an alternative explanation for Samsung’s reluctance to adopt Branch Metrics – the software might have been perceived as clunky, with few users clicking on its offered links. This line of questioning aimed to challenge the notion that Google’s influence was the sole reason behind Samsung’s decision.

The Ongoing Antitrust Trial

Patrick Chang’s testimony came during the fourth week of a more than two-month-long antitrust trial. The U.S. Justice Department seeks to demonstrate that Google has abused its monopoly power in the search and search advertising sectors. Google has consistently defended its business practices, asserting that they comply with the law.


Gogel influencers for Samsung’s decisions are not harmful to BranchMetrix software for Android smartphones, highlighting the power dynamics. The tech industry’s complex competition also underscores the challenges companies face when dealing with dominant players like Google, whose practices are now under scrutiny in a high-stakes antitrust case.