Live data from Hacker News

Bing considers paying sites to delist themselves from Google

marketwatch.com

41–42 of 42 posts

Re: Bing considers paying sites to delist themselves from Google

#41
post #29
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm actually afraid of the collective ignorance of most computer users today that Microsoft could win out with manipulative business practices like this - most internet users are layman and don't understand the integrity issues of whats going on here." OK, so let's assume this will work, for this reason, and game it out. I don't hold up the following analysis as Truth, just some thoughts. In the short term, even for…

Tiny nitpick: Microsoft was the 8th most profitable corporation in the world, last year. I am sure there are a lot of products that they sell extremely well, besides Windows / Office. Also, while they may not have produced many successes over 3 decades of platform wars, they have certainly ruined many competitors.

No. If you go look at the balance sheet, the profits are: Office and Windows, distant third XBox division, losses everywhere else.

Other things may "sell" well, but nothing else makes money.

That's how profitable Office and Windows are.

Incidentally, if you've ever wondered why Microsoft is so willing to go to bat for Windows or Office lockin, this is why. They are a mighty edifice built on two things, and if either one of them fails they are in for a world of hurt. This does put them ahead of Google, though, which is a mighty edifice built on one thing, ads.

This probably also explains why Microsoft might be willing to pump a lot of money into this task; cutting off Google's traffic cuts off their ads, which cuts off their Windows quasi-replacement (their new OS stuff) and their Office replacement (Google Docs). If Google was just sitting there, raking in dough from online ads, but had no OS or Google Docs, Microsoft would probably be content to just watch them, but Google really is a huge existential threat to Microsoft, who really is in a much more insecure position than it may seem if you just read the bottom line on the balance sheet.

Re: Bing considers paying sites to delist themselves from Google

#42
post #40
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I depends on the country but yes, and yes. http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2005/09/68928 http://cci.edu.au/publications/search-engine-liability-copyr... Parker v Yahoo takes the view that putting content online is implicitly allowing indexing. By the same logic, explicitly blocking an engine would mean the opposite. http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2008/10/search_engine_c...

The first link is about scanning, storing, and making available entire books. The last is about the caching ability. The second one includes some great information, but if you read about the specific cases (starting on page 6) you can see it is still very much up for debate. Actually it seems that the courts have ruled in Google's favor almost every time, and most of these are for caching and not indexing.

You are right that search engines have made some advances in the courts in recent years, but the bases for their wins are thin and not the same in all countries. Barring legal action a site can block Google's known IPs entirely, forcing a search engine to either give up or use subterfuges that are probably not practical for a large public company to use.

If a site really really wants to block a particular engine run by a for-profit company, or make it impractical (either legally or technically) they can.

Post reply on HN