Published On: November 3rd 2025
Authored By: Logavarshini S
Vellore Institute of Technology Chennai
INTRODUCTION
In the present day digital economy, a handful of tech giants, like Google, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft, collectively referred to as the “Big Tech” manages and dominates critical platforms that form the structure of diverse fields, such as commerce and communication. From social media, search engines to e-commerce, these corporations hold both immeasurable power and store vast personal data. The intersection of law with such dominance has caused worldwide debates on competition and privacy.
In India, this is no longer a theory that’s widely discussed. The Competition Commission of India [CCI] has, in recent years, investigated corporations like Google, Amazon and Meta for allegations of abuse of power and position. At the same time, the enactment of Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 brought forward new rules on how digital platforms deal with user data. These developments have now led to a question of the moment: How should India regulate Big Tech while balancing growth of the economy and innovation?
Competition law, also referred to as antitrust law in other countries, ensures that markets stay fair. It essentially prevents abuse of monopolies, cartels, and unfair agreements. This article would explore the above mentioned question and also how the existing traditional competition law frameworks are challenged by the Big Tech. It will examine recent CCI [Competition Commission of India] cases, also highlighting global approaches, and suggest reforms that are possible to address the rising issues and concerns.
BIG TECH AND MARKET POWER
While the Big Tech in India are companies such as Tata Consultancy Services, Infosys and HCL Tech, the competition law of India faces issues more often by multinational corporations, that are globally considered Big Tech. These tech companies control extensive amounts of information, and affect various aspects of the world. They exploit the effects of network and manage the economy such that it endangers free and fair competition in the market. This article would refer to the globally influential tech giants as “Big Tech”.
Big Tech corporations, such as Google, Amazon, Meta, and Apple, gain their power in the market from many defining features of digital platforms. Among these features, there are network effects and control of data. The utility of a platform with more users increases, and it becomes difficult to new ones to compete. Similarly, more users mean more data, and this access to large data allows them to refine their services well and more accessible. Here, the competition becomes inevitably unjust. For example, a study titled “The Case for
Data under the Indian Competition Law Framework” mentions that access to data by itself contributes as a source of dominance under Indian law, given the current provisions of the Competition Act, 2002.[1]
In India, CCI’s landmark case Umar Javeed, Sukarma Thapar, Aaquib Javeed v. Google LLC and Ors., 2019 serves as an important example of Google’s dominant position in Android powered devices and its practices, like mandatory pre-installation of Google’s apps that limits choices for OEMs and users.[2] Another earlier case is CCI vs. Google, where Google was fined in 2018 for being biased towards its own vertical search services over other general web search engines, violating Section 4 of the Competition Act.[3]
In journals, power misuse by platform is analysed in works such as Platform Power: Monopolisation and Financialisation in the Era of Big Tech, where it is highlighted how Big Tech takes control over “critical resources” (e.g. data, user base, algorithmic infrastructure) to establish dominance, repress competition, and wield influence both economically and politically.[4]
INDIAN LEGAL LANDSCAPE
Competition concerns around Big Tech are not limited to Google alone. The CCI has investigated the conduct of many Big Tech platforms for activities that abuse dominance. One notable case concerns the e-commerce giants Amazon and Flipkart. Based on a complaint filed by the Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh, the CCI in 2020 ordered for an investigation considering the allegations that both Amazon and Flipkart gave prioritised treatment to a selected number of sellers they preferred, of those many were directly linked to the platform. The complaint raised allegations about manipulation of search algorithms, exclusive tie-ups, and many discounting practices that put independent small retail sellers at a disadvantage. Proving these allegations would highlight not simple contractual issues but a structural fault of online markets in India, where dominance is abused to shape the choices of the consumers and to give an unfair advantage in competition.[5]
A similar controversy arose in 2021 when WhatsApp updated its privacy policy to make it mandatory for the user to share their data with Facebook [now Meta]. The CCI, by suo motu, held that such terms and conditions are exploiting the app’s presence in the Indian messaging market and raises competition concerns.[6] With over 400 million users in India, the dominance of the platform rendered the users unable to change to other platforms if they wanted to; somehow their consent is being coerced here. The CCI’s intervention was significant in showing how data, privacy, and competition concerns are deeply engrained in the digital economy. Together, these cases illustrate the evolving issues of Big Tech regulation, where the concerns of fairness and dominance are extensive beyond traditional analysis of antitrust.
COMPARATIVE INSIGHTS
When we look at how other countries deal with Big Tech, it is clear that India is not alone in facing these challenges. The European Union has taken the boldest step with its Digital Markets Act (DMA). Instead of waiting for companies to break the law, the DMA directly places duties on “gatekeepers” like Google, Apple, and Amazon. These duties include allowing interoperability, sharing data fairly, and avoiding self-preference. This approach ensures that harmful conduct is prevented before it can even occur.[7] The United States, although traditionally cautious, has also stepped up. Recent cases against Google show that even under the existing antitrust framework, courts are willing to recognize and restrain monopolistic practices.[8]This signals that competition law can still evolve with the digital economy.
China has gone down an even stricter path. The massive fine of RMB 18.2 billion on Alibaba in 2021 for forcing sellers into exclusivity agreements shows the state’s strong commitment to disciplining tech giants.[9] The United Kingdom has meanwhile introduced its own Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act, which gives regulators the power to design specific codes of conduct for dominant firms.[10] For India, these comparative approaches offer valuable lessons: adopt faster case handling, consider targeted rules for digital gatekeepers, and work with global regulators to address cross-border concerns.
CHALLENGES IN INDIA
Despite the CCI’s active role, tackling Big Tech in India remains a steep uphill climb. One of the biggest issues is the speed of proceedings. By the time an investigation is completed, the market has often already shifted, and the alleged harm may be irreversible. In the fast-moving digital economy, delay itself becomes a win for dominant firms. Another concern is the imbalance of resources. Global tech giants have access to top-tier legal teams and vast financial backing, while the regulator is still developing specialized digital expertise. This makes it difficult to create a truly level playing field.
There is also the problem of overlapping jurisdictions. Data protection, consumer protection, and competition law frequently intersect in digital cases. For example, the WhatsApp privacy policy controversy raised concerns not only about market power but also about user data rights. Yet, India does not yet have a seamless framework to coordinate between different regulators. Finally, there is the challenge of dependence. India’s digital economy relies heavily on Big Tech platforms for e-commerce, payments, and even basic communication. Any harsh regulatory action risks disrupting services that millions of people depend on daily. These challenges underline the need for reforms that are not just reactive but also anticipatory, enabling regulators to keep pace with the digital giants they oversee.
THE WAY FORWARD
To handle the growing influence of Big Tech, India needs to shift from being reactive to being proactive. The first step is strengthening the Competition Commission of India (CCI) with more digital expertise and faster procedures. A dedicated wing for technology markets could help the regulator keep pace with rapidly changing business models.
India can also learn from global practices. Instead of only penalizing misconduct after it happens, pre-emptive obligations on dominant platforms, such as transparency in algorithms or fair data-sharing could prevent harm at the root. The proposed Digital Competition Bill is a step in this direction, and its successful implementation will be crucial. Another important step is coordination among regulators. Issues of competition, data privacy, and consumer protection are deeply interconnected. A formal mechanism for collaboration between the CCI, the Data Protection Board, and consumer bodies would reduce overlaps and increase clarity.
At the same time, regulators should avoid stifling innovation. India’s tech ecosystem is still developing, and start-ups often depend on larger platforms to reach consumers. Regulation should therefore focus on preventing abusive practices without discouraging partnerships and growth. Ultimately, the goal is not to punish Big Tech for being big, but to ensure that size does not come at the cost of fairness, innovation, and consumer choice.
CONCLUSION
Big Tech has become an inseparable part of India’s digital economy, shaping how people shop, communicate, and access services. While these platforms have opened new opportunities, their growing dominance has also raised concerns about fairness, choice, and accountability. Cases involving Google, Amazon, Flipkart, and WhatsApp reflect how concentrated power can tilt the market against smaller players and consumers.
India’s competition law framework has taken important steps, but it needs to adapt faster to the realities of the digital age. Building regulatory expertise, learning from global models, and adopting rules that prevent harm before it occurs will be important. At the same time, regulation must not stifle innovation or discourage growth. India’s start-up ecosystem thrives on collaboration with larger platforms.
The task, then, is to strike a careful balance: encouraging the benefits of scale while ensuring markets remain open, fair, and competitive for all.
REFERENCES
[1] Ishita, The Case for Data under the Indian Competition Law Framework (2021) TLH Law
[2] Competition Commission of India, Umar Javeed, Sukarma Thapar & Ors v Google LLC & Ors (Case 39 of 2018) CCI Press Release No. 55/2022-23
[3] Abuse of dominant position: CCI fines Google Rs 136 crore for ‘search bias’ in India (The Indian Express, 9 February 2018)
[4] Zhongjin Li and Hao Qi, “Platform Power: Monopolisation and Financialisation in the Era of Big Tech” (2022) 46 Cambridge Journal of Economics 1289
[5] Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh v Amazon Seller Services Pvt Ltd and Flipkart Internet Pvt Ltd (2020) CCI Case No 40 of 2019
[6] In re: Updated Terms of Service and Privacy Policy of Whatsapp LLC (2021) Suo Motu Case No 01 of 2021
[7]European Commission, About the Digital Markets Act (European Commission)
[8]Reuters, ‘Google has an illegal monopoly on search, US judge finds’(5 August 2025)
[9] State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR)/ reporting: China fines Alibaba RMB 18.2 billion for monopolistic acts (April 2021)
[10] Ashurst/Hausfeld, Digital Market Regulation in the EU and UK: DMA v DMCC (22 August 2024).
