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

France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 160 posts

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#61

Post by freehunter »

Tichy wrote: post #37
freehunter wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as they start charging for access. See, this is the problem with deceptive headlines, they make people argue points that don't exist.

So what if I have a company that sells information and Wikipedia ruins my business by offering information for free? Edit: even if Wikipedia is non-profit, what if their secret main sponsor is some news outlet, for example?

That doesn't matter. There is no law nor any court ruling even in France against providing free services. Here is the entire key to the issue:

>Bottin Cartographes argued that Google was only planning to give away the service for free until all the competitors had been driven out of business and then they would start charging.

It's not about free services, it's about willfully plotting to gain marketshare via free services with specific intent on charging for the service once the competitors have been driven out. While I believe the French ruling is faulty (where is the proof?), this isn't an issue of free vs paid.

The analogy only works if Wikipedia has specific intent to begin charging for access once your business is gone.

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#62

Post by mattmanser »

ekianjo wrote: post #54
kolinko wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this what game theory is about? Smaller competitors won't open up, because even if Carrefour has high prices, the chain can lower prices any time to wipe out the competitors again. So, the monopolist can have arbitrarily high prices because nobody will invest in opening shops. This is one of the situations in which free market fails to deliver the optimal (for consumers) solution.

It's not just about prices. It was only about prices, then there would be McDonalds everywhere and nothing else. If farmers were to open their own stores, they could still manage to have reasonable prices, and make their point on "best quality", "organic food", plus offering some plants / species you would never be able to find in a big supermarket. You can't go head to head against Carrefour by just providing the sa…

You do realise you're actually arguing against your own point 2 up?

You said the reason the small traders went out of business is price, but now they suddenly shouldn't differentiate on price?

You don't really seem to understand monopolies or free markets or how they operate.

1. Monopoly emerges 2. Competitor opens 3. Monopoly slashes prices in local store, while maintaing prices in all others 4. Competitor runs out of cash, closes 5. Monopoly puts prices back up

That's how it works. You can also replace 3 with 'Monopoly slashes prices everywhere and relies on its cash reserves'.

But hey, you ARE French, of course you're right. The same thing of big chains killing all small towns isn't happening in the UK too for example. Oh wait, it is.

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#63

Post by AlisdairO »

ekianjo wrote: post #45
forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That is great. except when all other competition dies (because who can compete with a better, freer version of your product?) google starts charging pretty rediculous rates." This is what happened with big malls in Europe, small retailers could not compete in price so they got out of business. Now some of the malls have bigger prices that what small retailers had, as they have way less competition. E.g Carrefour bou…

Actually, this kind of law does not make any sense. In the case of carrefour, since they are charging such high prices nowadays, what prevents a bunch of farmers to associate themselves and open their own mall to sell cheaper and regain market share? Nothing, absolutely nothing. They just can't be bothered. Lack of competition is not only about big brands killing small ones. It's also part of the culture. It's been a…

> Actually, this kind of law does not make any sense. In the case of carrefour, since they are charging such high prices nowadays, what prevents a bunch of farmers to associate themselves and open their own mall to sell cheaper and regain market share?

The knowledge that the big mall will simply temporarily lower its prices below what the collective could reasonably do (due to their lower size/efficiency) until they're dead, and then re-raise them again?

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#64

Post by ramblerman »

brudgers wrote: post #51
alexis-d wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain me the downvotes? I mean the Microsoft/Google thing was a half serious, half joke question.

Half serious comments and snark often get downvoted - particularly when they add nothing to the discussion, and almost inevitably when they are appear intended to take the discussion off track by baiting partisan disagreements or fanboyism. Downvotes should be considered editorial feedback - either you didn't make your point clearly, or your comment is considered likely to derail the discussion. Use the "edit" and "d…

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#65

Post by aptwebapps »

ttt_ wrote: post #56
kolinko wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this what game theory is about? Smaller competitors won't open up, because even if Carrefour has high prices, the chain can lower prices any time to wipe out the competitors again. So, the monopolist can have arbitrarily high prices because nobody will invest in opening shops. This is one of the situations in which free market fails to deliver the optimal (for consumers) solution.

>> This is one of the situations in which free market fails to deliver the optimal (for consumers) solution. I never considered the free market idea to be based on delivering the optimal solution for consumers, actually the oposite, it delivers the optimal solution for enterprises, specially the big ones where the real money and power is made and retained or traded. Market does not preocupy with people, the state doe…

Maybe you don't look at it that way, but a lot of other people do. Indeed, it is a central tennet of the free market philosophy.

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#66

Post by batista »

ekianjo wrote: post #45
forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That is great. except when all other competition dies (because who can compete with a better, freer version of your product?) google starts charging pretty rediculous rates." This is what happened with big malls in Europe, small retailers could not compete in price so they got out of business. Now some of the malls have bigger prices that what small retailers had, as they have way less competition. E.g Carrefour bou…

Actually, this kind of law does not make any sense. In the case of carrefour, since they are charging such high prices nowadays, what prevents a bunch of farmers to associate themselves and open their own mall to sell cheaper and regain market share? Nothing, absolutely nothing. They just can't be bothered. Lack of competition is not only about big brands killing small ones. It's also part of the culture. It's been a…

Actually, this kind of law does not make any sense. In the case of carrefour, since they are charging such high prices nowadays, what prevents a bunch of farmers to associate themselves and open their own mall to sell cheaper and regain market share? Nothing, absolutely nothing. They just can't be bothered.

Nothing? Never had any experience in retail business ownership, right?

For starters, because Carrefour has a HUGE cross country AND multi-national supply chain. Because of it's mass wholesale ordering it can assure killer prices and it also has money-to-burn in the bank. So, if they threaten it, it can lower it's prices for a while to compete, until it destroys them. They cannot afford do the same.

Second, Carrefour has the scale, which means it also has: thousands of other goods, exclusive deals, loss leaders, etc. Even if Carrefour couldn't compete on price (which it can, 200%), but had somewhat similar prices, it wouldn't make much sense for the buyer to spend gas plus time to go to two places just to buy some stuff cheaper in one, if he can get everything he wants in Carrefour.

Third, Carrefour with its size, get the lion's share of advertising. Which DOES matter.

Lastly, it's the bloody cost. It's another thing to open a retail outlet in a competitive environment, and totally another to open one where a few big mega-malls have saturated the market and killed everybody else. Uncertainty, and the ample opportunities for the big guy to crash you at will makes the move all too risk.

That's it, in a nutshell. Why you'd believe that the problem is that they haven't thought of it, or that they aren't "entrepreneurial" enough?

(Btw, such moves are even attempted in a lot of places with similar conditions. Very rarely they end well).

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#67

Post by WayneDB »

mattmanser wrote: post #57
babarock wrote: post #47

How come we assume that Google is going to start charging as soon as competitors died? I draw analogies with the IE vs Netscape history. When IE became bundled for free in Windows, Netscape open-sourced its code to survive. Where would the browser be today had a judge ruled that Microsoft cannot do this and that Microsoft (and Netscape) should continue charging for their product?

It would be able to fly. But seriously, the general consensus is that IE was a Bad Thing in the long run. Also Netscape did not open-source the code 'to survive'. Don't reinvent history.

The general consensus is not that IE was a bad thing in the long run. Perhaps nobody likes IE today, but that does not mean it's a bad thing at all. Certainly it was the impetus for Firefox being born and they introduced XmlHttpRequest. Those are important (and GOOD) things.

Also, Netscape certainly did not open source their product until they were thoroughly beaten in the market, ~1998. Before that, they were still trying to make money by selling the software. So, regardless of what you or anyone else says about why Netscape did it, we all know why they did it.

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#68

Post by unreal37 »

Karunamon wrote: post #30
dangrossman wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that in a market for a service which is very expensive to provide, one participant offering that service for free will encourage competition, or will it drive the others out of business? If you agree that it will drive them out of business, then you agree that offering the service for free is anticompetitive. The situation here is more complicated than that, and not all anticompetitive action is not ille…

(deleted my OP due to people using the down arrow for "disagree") >Do you think that in a market for a service which is very expensive to provide, one participant offering that service for free will encourage competition, or will it drive the others out of business? I'm sorry but I'm finding it very hard to justify the government stepping in and saying "Nuh-uh, you're not charging enough". If this was a case of preda…

I actually have some sympathy for companies that are working solely in an industry like cartography, that have Google come in and offer the same service for free.

Yes, on the one hand, it forces the competitors to develop better products and justify charging for them. But on the other, Google is clearly using their billions made from search advertising to dominate another unrelated industry.

It was wrong when Microsoft did it, it's still wrong when Google does it.

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#69

Post by thematt »

dlikhten wrote: post #5

Reporter totally misses the point. The point is that google provided google maps for free. That is great. except when all other competition dies (because who can compete with a better, freer version of your product?) google starts charging pretty rediculous rates. That move in itself is what contributed to the ruling. OSM is free for everyone. It is a wiki. If OSM destroys google, bing, etc, and then decides to go on…

That's ridiculous. How can they be punished for something you think they might do?

Re: France convicts Google Maps for unfair competition

#70

Post by tylermenezes »

thematt wrote: post #69
dlikhten wrote: post #5

Reporter totally misses the point. The point is that google provided google maps for free. That is great. except when all other competition dies (because who can compete with a better, freer version of your product?) google starts charging pretty rediculous rates. That move in itself is what contributed to the ruling. OSM is free for everyone. It is a wiki. If OSM destroys google, bing, etc, and then decides to go on…

That's ridiculous. How can they be punished for something you think they might do?

They did that. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/27/google_maps_api_no_l...
Post reply on HN