Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 414 posts

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#231

Post by Angostura »

Veelox wrote: post #205

Just trying to get the facts straight. Google provided the ability to search your site. They also allowed you to show ads/make money from these searches. If you wanted to use this, you had to only show Google ads. I don't understand how that is illegal.

Because, as I understand it, Google was saying that if you used it search service, you were prohibited from showing non-Google ads anywhere else on the site.

You couldn't just use Google Search and accept ads in those search results a cost of use. This sounds rather like abuse of a dominant position in one area to squash competitors in another.

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#232

Post by Sahhaese »

Veelox wrote: post #205

Just trying to get the facts straight. Google provided the ability to search your site. They also allowed you to show ads/make money from these searches. If you wanted to use this, you had to only show Google ads. I don't understand how that is illegal.

Not leveraging dominance in one area to push a different area is the basis of our anti-monopoly laws.

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#233

Post by Angostura »

vectorEQ wrote: post #203
kierenj wrote: post #35

I was wondering where funds from such a fine go: "Fines imposed on companies found in breach of EU antitrust rules are paid into the general EU budget. This money is not earmarked for particular expenses, but Member States' contributions to the EU budget for the following year are reduced accordingly. The fines therefore help to finance the EU and reduce the burden for taxpayers."

"The fines therefore help to finance the EU and reduce the burden for taxpayers." reduce burden for taxpayers... yeah. how? i don't see my taxes dropping because ppl get fined >.> even if the amount of fines would raise consistently by 1000% still i would pay the same taxes, guarantee you that.

> i don't see my taxes dropping because ppl get fined

What were your tax contributions to the EU last year compared with the year before?

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#234

Post by mfoy_ »

yeahitslikethat wrote: post #195
zaroth wrote: post #161

This is not for AdSense on Google.com, this is for third-party sites with a search feature showing search ads to their own customers. A third-party site who wants to show ads in their own search results could partner with Google to include AdSense ads in their own results. The Google contract originally required exclusivity, and then was changed to require Google ads to be more prominent. In the context of the market…

As long as the punishment for the crime is less than the crime itself, crime will perpetuate. If you steal 1.000,00€ from a bank, they don't fine you 1€. No. They send you to jail for years.

Not sure why you're being down-voted... without a punitive component to the fine, (i.e. if it were only damages) then Google would have absolutely zero incentive to even pretend to change their ways. They could just pay a small fine, laugh, and say "See you next year."

EDIT: And now I'm getting down-voted too. Would you nay-sayers care to chime in with more than an e-frown?

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#235

Post by Consultant32452 »

esarbe wrote: post #223
Consultant32452 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe part of the purpose of corporations is to create an entity that is capable of doing "icky" things that might be unpalatable for a person to do, but need to be done nonetheless. Specific examples of "icky" things include building war weapons, producing/testing drugs that we know will kill some patients, performing tasks which create pollution which will kill people, etc. I want to be clear that I'm not propo…

If that's the case, that sounds like a good argument to not allow incorporation.

Do you have another suggestion for how to get icky things done which must be done?

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#236

Post by AnaniasAnanas »

jamisteven wrote: post #33
AnaniasAnanas wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google does indeed need to be broken up, but much less than Microsoft. Google has actually done good for the whole world with their open source initiatives, opening of webm, etc - plus all(?) of their products are easily replaceable, unlike say windows which has exclusive programs written for it.

If by open source you mean free if they can keep your data and then some, then sure.

No, by open source I mean things like https://www.webmproject.org/, https://golang.org/, https://www.chromium.org/blink, their contributions to existing foss projects like gcc and the linux kernel, and initiatives like https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/.

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#239

Post by olalonde »

throwaway9d0291 wrote: post #114
isolli wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the difference is market share...

No, not really. Basically the way the EU sees it, Google has a monopoly in a market: mobile operating systems. That is, if you're an OEM and you want to sell a device with an operating system, Google is currently the only place you can really turn. Apple exists but since it doesn't sell its operating system, it's not a participant in this market. So the EU saw Google saying to OEMs "you can have Android but you have…

As far as I know, Android is open source and any OEM is free to use it without asking permission. The licensing program is for the right to install proprietary Google apps like the Play Store or Google Maps. There are plenty of Chinese OEMs who aren't licensed and sell phones without the Play store.

Re: Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising

#240

Post by mfoy_ »

aeorgnoieang wrote: post #202
sosodev wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Why should corporations get off easy when we don't?

Why shouldn't we all get off easy (or easier)?

Imagine if the punishment for stealing was to be fined for 10% of the amount you stole. Like, you get to keep 90% of it.

You'd rob a bank and then drop by the police station to drop off their cut just to avoid the hassle of "getting investigated" later.

So obviously the punishment has to be worse than the value of doing it. But not 1:1 either, if you know you'll only catch 50% of robbers, then the fine would have to be something like ${amountStolen}*3 so that the equation makes the Expected return of robbery sharply negative. I.e. if you expect to get caught 50% of the time, and only had to return the money you stole when caught... then robbery would be very profitable. If you had to pay twice what you stole, then the Expected return is actually a wash, and wouldn't necessarily deter potential robbers. However if you have to pay a fine of 3x what you stole and you think you'll get caught 50% of the time then it's a money-losing venture.

This is all ignoring jail time, of course, because no one can send Google to jail... so from the corporations point of view it just comes down to money.

Post reply on HN