When an Android user says “Hey Google” to summon a voice assistant, that two-word command triggers a chain of system-level privileges no competing AI product can match. The European Commission now wants to break that lock. In a formal proceeding filed under the Digital Markets Act, EU regulators have told Google to open Android’s core services, starting with the always-listening wake-word trigger, to rival AI assistants that currently have no way to compete at the operating-system level.
A public consultation on the proposed measures opened on April 27, 2026, and closes on May 13, 2026, giving competitors, developers, and the public a narrow window to weigh in before the Commission locks in binding requirements.
What the Commission is demanding
The proceeding, logged as case DMA.100220, is grounded in Article 6(7) of the Digital Markets Act, which requires designated gatekeepers to let third-party services interoperate with the same operating-system features their own products enjoy. In plain terms: if Google’s Gemini AI can listen for a wake word, launch hands-free, and tap into on-device hardware, rivals must be able to do the same.
The Commission’s preliminary findings conclude that Google’s current setup does not meet that standard. Regulators have moved past the exploratory phase and issued draft measures spelling out which capabilities must be shared. Wake-word invocation is the flagship example, but the legal obligation is broad enough to cover background execution privileges, access to on-device AI accelerators, notification-system integration, and default-assistant settings. The consultation documents do not yet provide an exhaustive feature list, leaving the final scope to be shaped partly by incoming feedback.
For the roughly 300 million Android users across the EU, the practical effect could be significant. Today, switching from Google’s built-in assistant to a competitor typically means sacrificing hands-free activation and deep system integration. If the Commission’s measures hold, users could eventually summon an alternative AI with the same seamless experience Google reserves for its own product.
Google’s pushback on security grounds
Google has signaled resistance, raising security and privacy concerns about granting broad system-level access to third parties. According to Bloomberg reporting on the draft findings, the company argues that Android’s permission architecture exists to protect users, and that loosening it could introduce new attack surfaces.
That argument is familiar. Google made similar claims during the EU’s earlier Android antitrust case, which resulted in a 4.34 billion euro fine in 2018 over the bundling of Google Search and Chrome with the Play Store. The company appealed portions of that decision but ultimately made changes to its licensing practices in Europe. The current proceeding operates under a different legal framework, the DMA, which was designed to move faster than traditional antitrust enforcement and places the burden on gatekeepers to demonstrate compliance rather than on regulators to prove harm after the fact.
Google has not published a detailed technical counter-proposal or filed a public compliance report specific to this case. Without that, it is difficult to gauge which interoperability scenarios the company considers workable and which it views as genuine security risks versus competitive advantages it would prefer to maintain.
What competitors and developers are watching
No named rival has yet issued a formal public statement tied to this specific proceeding, though the consultation period gives them until May 13 to do so. The complaints driving the case, however, are well-documented in the Commission’s own preliminary findings. AI companies and device manufacturers have argued for years that Google’s grip on Android’s low-level features creates a structural disadvantage that no amount of engineering on their end can overcome. A startup can build a superior voice assistant, but if it cannot wake up without the user manually opening an app, it will never match the convenience of saying “Hey Google.”
The stakes extend beyond voice. As AI assistants evolve into general-purpose interfaces, controlling the entry point on a phone becomes a gateway to search, commerce, messaging, and app interaction. Companies investing heavily in large language models, from well-funded labs to device makers building their own on-device AI, have a direct commercial interest in whether Android’s integration layer remains a Google monopoly or becomes a contested market.
There is also a fragmentation question that the Commission’s draft measures have not fully addressed. Android already varies significantly across manufacturers, with Samsung, Xiaomi, and others layering their own software on top of Google’s base. Adding multiple AI assistants with deep system access could create further inconsistency in how phones behave. Google has historically used this argument to justify centralized control, while critics say the real cost of that consistency is reduced competition and fewer choices for users.
The consultation deadline and what follows by mid-May
The consultation closing on May 13, 2026, is the next concrete milestone. After that, the Commission will review submissions and finalize binding measures. The DMA allows fines of up to 10 percent of a company’s global annual revenue for violations, with penalties rising to 20 percent for repeat offenses, though the Commission has not specified a penalty schedule or compliance timeline for this particular case.
The proceeding also sets a precedent that reaches beyond Google. Other companies designated as gatekeepers under the DMA are watching closely. If the Commission successfully forces open Android’s AI layer, similar interoperability demands could follow for other platforms where a dominant company’s own AI enjoys privileged system access.
For now, the clearest picture of what regulators intend comes from the Commission’s own published documents, not from secondhand summaries. The consultation notice and case record lay out the legal basis, scope, and timeline. As stakeholders file their positions over the coming days, the debate will shift from whether Google must open Android’s AI infrastructure to how deeply, how quickly, and with what safeguards. The answers will shape how hundreds of millions of Europeans interact with AI on their phones.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
