> Telstra and Optus to only pre-install Google Search on Android phones they sold to consumers, and not other search engines.

> In return, Telstra and Optus received a share of the revenue Google generated from ads displayed to consumers when they used Google Search on their Android phones.

So Telstra and Optus entered into this agreement and profited from it, too. Singling out Google is a strange choice given that all parties profited.

> So Telstra and Optus entered into this agreement and profited from it, too. Singling out Google is a strange choice given that all parties profited.

Kind of like how Microsoft was found[0] to do something similar with PC manufacturers?

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

It's not about who made money directly. It's about Google using its market dominance to increase its market dominance. Telstra and Optus are not accused of abusing their market dominance because they don't have anything like market dominance so they are hardly a concern in this particular situation.

> Singling out Google is a strange choice given that all parties profited.

Profiting isn't the misdeed, artificially suppressing competition is. Only Google experienced the benefit of suppressed competition, and that's why they were the ones paying the kickback, not receiving it.