When Microsoft attempted to bundle Internet Explorer into the Windows Operating system, it drew the ire of many, including the EU. Microsoft claimed that it was about innovation and all that. That didn't fly with the EU:
The tying of Internet Explorer with Windows, which makes Internet Explorer available on 90% of the world's PCs, distorts competition on the merits between competing web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match.
Ultimately, MS was forced to pull IE from the core OS.
So, fast-forward... the IPhone (the dominant mobile device) by default ships with the Safari browser. In fact, all mobile devices ship with a single Web Browser. But the clear and obvious leader is Apple. So, is Apple exploiting an "an artificial distribution advantage"? No one seems to be complaining. But, Opera and FireFox, in particular seem to be at a disadvantage here.
If I were them, I'd insist (whatever that means legally) that users of the IPhone have the option to download/use any Web browser right from the get go. They'd certainly have a precedent where a dominate OS/Framework was prevented from using it's market share to establish an unfair advantage and distribution of its Web Browser.
Did the EU not tell MS that is must give users a choice of a default Browser? Did they not force MS to, in the end, ship Windows 7 without a default browser. So, shouldn't IPhone/Android/WP7 give me a choice instead of cramming their browser down my throat? Let's say I want to run Opera on my IPhone... I should be able to.