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

U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 261 posts

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#111

Post by kreeben »

lenkite wrote: post #95
epistasis wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Amazon sees what products are successful and profitable, then makes knock-offs which they promote over the originals. And now, reading into this, Google is manipulating their ad markets using inside knowledge. This is nothing new, as brick and mortar retailers have store brands for popular products as well. While I'm glad that the move to the internet lets us reevaluate some of the social relations, I have a reeeea…

"This is nothing new, as brick and mortar retailers have store brands for popular products as well". The analogy seems spurious to me. Do brick and mortar retailers charge other brands for being a market-place ? Don't they actually buy products of other brands ?

Some super markets carry your favorite brand of frozen chicken nuggets, others do not. Makes me think there are agreements between producers and retailers and that those agreements are all about money.

I bet there are clauses in those agreements that state that the retailer should "make my brand of ketchup the first brand that customers see" and that they cater to that clause "for a small fee".

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#112

Post by capableweb »

ReaLNero wrote: post #110
rapnie wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It always completely astounded me how countless professional businesses are casually and mindlessly handing over their most private internal communication and metrics to Google on a platter. And aren't Google's privacy policies and ToS's stating that all collected information can be used to "improve their own services" or something along those lines? Does that include 'extract business advantage' from your data? I do…

(Not a Google engineer) Google's engineers are notoriously loose-lipped (which is a good thing!!!). There's no way they would be able to keep a secret like this. Anytime a customer's private data gets accessed, you either a) need approval by someone or b) "break the glass", which is only reserved for oncall fires. Either way, it gets audited. The only way I would believe something like this is if an executive/higher…

The last case of ad bidding proves that while not everyone at Google knows whats going on, they are abusing the data they are sitting on.

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#113

Post by waterloosong »

dillondoyle wrote: post #59
nuclearnice3 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't fully understand the mechanics either, but one point of clarification that might help. > - "Google allegedly dropped the second-highest bids" >> - So publishers still got paid the highest bid? During the relevant period and until end of 2021, Google is running a second price auction. The highest bid wins and then pays the second highest bid.

Yeah that's what I wrote in the later part the $10,7,5 example I thought might be the case. If that's the flat out only thing literally happening, I can't think of a reasonable reason that would be in the best interest of the publishers paying google to sell supply side. it's all jumbled when you control all sides of the auction and infrastructure which is the real problem IMHO. Maybe I can see a scenario where bid s…

fair enough, reverse engineering media reporting on legal documents can be tricky

You need to realize just one more thing: to ensure that there is no peeking into bids of other networks, the actual code of the auction could be executed on a remote server. But only a naive implementation would ask every ad network client to send all their ad bids to the server; on the other hand having ad networks send only the highest bid would not be enough for a second-price auction...

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#114

Post by seanhunter »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #60
mabbo wrote: post #53

As more data comes out about Google, Apple, Amazon, one simple underlying thing becomes clear: a single company cannot be trusted to operate a marketplace while also being a participant . Apple's App Store insider knowledge lets them discover popular apps, then boot them off the platform when they decide to compete. Amazon sees what products are successful and profitable, then makes knock-offs which they promote over…

The underlying assumption is that this behavior is bad. Why is it bad? Especially bad enough to be regulated by a new law?

For one thing it's bad because of information asymmetry between the market owner and other participants. The market owner knows all the information but each other participant only knows a fraction of the information. If the information was all completely public it would be less bad probably. This is why in financial markets "dark pools" (private alternative execution venues) ended up getting new regulation from the SEC to prevent abuse https://www.cfainstitute.org/en/advocacy/issues/dark-pools#s...

Antitrust law doesn't come into effect just because something is bad in the abstract sense though, it comes into effect when there is harm to the consumer as a result (that's my understanding anyway). The harm here is due to the market distortion primarily (I would think).

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#115

Post by seanhunter »

kaycebasques wrote: post #17

> The lawsuit also highlights Google's use of a secret program dubbed "Project Bernanke" in 2013 that used bidding data to give its own ad-buying an advantage. For example, in a 2015 iteration of the program, Google allegedly dropped the second-highest bids from publishers' auctions, accumulated money into a pool and then spent that money to inflate only the bids belonging advertisers who used the company's Google Ad…

It's hard not to think this would be outright fraud rather than an antitrust issue to be honest. It will be interesting to see how this claim holds up.

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#116

Post by jdavis703 »

mabbo wrote: post #53

As more data comes out about Google, Apple, Amazon, one simple underlying thing becomes clear: a single company cannot be trusted to operate a marketplace while also being a participant . Apple's App Store insider knowledge lets them discover popular apps, then boot them off the platform when they decide to compete. Amazon sees what products are successful and profitable, then makes knock-offs which they promote over…

What apps does Apple sell in the App Store that used to be sold by third parties, but were then banned?

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#117

Post by pgeorgi »

t-3 wrote: post #56
mhh__ wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that looking a gift horse in the mouth?

Not really, when any investigations or actions are likely to be indefinitely delayed as soon as a lobbyist writes check. If they actually do something other than slap-on-the-wrist fines that don't even do damage, you won't hear me complaining, but I don't have high expectations. The EU seems to be far more interested in reigning in big tech, but they don't seem to be any more succesful, and their most substantive eff…

> I mean, really, is anyone's privacy improved by having more javascript popups added to every single page?

How about app stores implementing "privacy dashboards" where you can see what data an app collects and how it uses it? With the idea that app makers become more careful in what they do because it becomes so obvious. That's a result of the GDPR.

Things take a while when the law is designed for not being used as a ban hammer but to coerce better behavior. The DPAs are mostly working in the background to get actors into compliance. Every time you see a lawsuit over such things, a multi-year process broke down to the point where that's the last recourse.

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#118

Post by [deleted] »

capableweb wrote: post #112
ReaLNero wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Not a Google engineer) Google's engineers are notoriously loose-lipped (which is a good thing!!!). There's no way they would be able to keep a secret like this. Anytime a customer's private data gets accessed, you either a) need approval by someone or b) "break the glass", which is only reserved for oncall fires. Either way, it gets audited. The only way I would believe something like this is if an executive/higher…

The last case of ad bidding proves that while not everyone at Google knows whats going on, they are abusing the data they are sitting on.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#119

Post by pgeorgi »

ziml77 wrote: post #61
t-3 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, when any investigations or actions are likely to be indefinitely delayed as soon as a lobbyist writes check. If they actually do something other than slap-on-the-wrist fines that don't even do damage, you won't hear me complaining, but I don't have high expectations. The EU seems to be far more interested in reigning in big tech, but they don't seem to be any more succesful, and their most substantive eff…

Is it possible the EU is being careful because the major tech companies that it would want to punish are all American? People over here could see those actions as the EU trying to take down American companies so that companies in EU countries can take an overwhelmingly dominant position. I would imagine that perception could lead to restrictions and tariffs just like we've applied to China.

I'm not sure the EU cares: http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/editorcharts/EU-GOOGLE-...

Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google

#120

Post by rcdwealth »

ngngngng wrote: post #67
mabbo wrote: post #53

As more data comes out about Google, Apple, Amazon, one simple underlying thing becomes clear: a single company cannot be trusted to operate a marketplace while also being a participant . Apple's App Store insider knowledge lets them discover popular apps, then boot them off the platform when they decide to compete. Amazon sees what products are successful and profitable, then makes knock-offs which they promote over…

Does this only go for internet companies? Or do you think it applies to Walmart selling its own Equate brand of everything or Costco selling its own Kirkland brand of everything?

Difference is that neither Wallmart, Equate, Costco are marketplaces for third parties.
Post reply on HN