Google hit with €1.5B fine from EU over advertising • Hacker News Board

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

#161

Post by zaroth » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:26 PM UTC

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 for third-party sites running search ads, the $1.5 billion fine seems extremely high.

On the one hand, it’s not immediately obvious to take a conglomorate’s total worldwide revenue into account to value a fine for a specific market, versus considering only the revenue for that market.

However in this case Google is squeezing out companies like Yahoo and Bing from increasing their own ad inventory in the few ways that are available to them, aside from increasing their own organic search traffic. So this is where the anti-competitive behavior comes in, and perhaps why the fine is so massive.

I can’t imagine keyword search on third-party sites is responsible for a significant share of overall AdSense revenue, I wonder if it’s even a single digit percentage of their overall ad inventory?

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

#162

Post by Nasrudith » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:30 PM UTC

pushpop wrote: post #63

Dylan16807 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very small cost that all companies should already be able to handle if they're to be trusted with personal data.

That's the crux of it. It's not asking companies to do anything they shouldn't have already been doing if they were conscious about security. The problem is it's been blown completely out of proportion to a point where by son's child minder sent out letters asking for our permission to contact us if our child is unwell (Of course she should - that isn't unsolicited contact. She was already covered!).

Not quite actually - sensible practice from a security standpoint alone (as opposed to transparency) would be to have a delete but not a download button as it would make exfiltrating data with a compromised account easier. That is the flipside of power to the user - more exploitability. I don't blame them for the goal (right to know is a valid interest for consumers) but we have to acknowledge consequences if we want to avoid future errors.

The back up clearing involved would also be a pain in the ass and boost expenses of compliance (can't just use write only storage which nicely solves other problems) but it isn't insurmountable.

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

#163

Post by stingraycharles » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:30 PM UTC

curt15 wrote: post #65

robin_reala wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was the result of a (later overturned) ruling in 2000: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...

So basically nothing happened in the end?

Apparently Microsoft invested into Apple around that time. Apple was doing poorly, and Microsoft “needed” a competitor to show that they are not completely dominating the market.

Right after the case was settled, Microsoft sold their shares again.

It’s said that this investment likely helped Apple survive through that period.

Given Apple’s market position right now, it’s not a stretch to assume this to be a direct result of the antitrust case against Microsoft.

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

#164

Post by cbg0 » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:30 PM UTC

hopler wrote: post #129

throwaway9d0291 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Google could satisfy EU by cancelling OEM Android licensing programming and reducing consumer choice to Google phones only, relegating OEMs to suppliers like "good" Apple, and putting most OEMs out of business. Good job, EU.

Google could do that, but it would hurt their business tremendously, as the amount of diverse brands which provide their own unique flavor on top of Android is what helps them keep this dominance.

Reducing the choice to just Google phones running Android will spark other providers to develop their own OS and increase competition in the market, which would indeed lead a great deal of people to say "Good job, EU" if the EU was the catalyst for such a scenario.

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

#165

Post by C1sc0cat » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:31 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #50

growlist wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not pretend it's not a mixed bag, e.g.: 'European multinationals are aggressively pursuing one of milk’s few growth markets, where locals say they can’t compete.' https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-milk-scramble-for-africa...

At the same time, the EU spends a lot of money on subsidies just so that farms (big and small) can keep their head above water. I wouldn't mind if that was changed somewhat, give smaller farms more survivability, but at the same time it's the market forces that should be changed so that farmers get fairer prices for their products.

And this also hurts Cane sugar producers - sugar beet is much more energy intensive

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

#166

Post by 908087 » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:32 PM UTC

askmike wrote: post #127

askmike wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took me half a day: Had to download a GDPR pivacy policy template, read through the thing. Double check all the sections applied to what I was doing (cookies, etc) and fill in my details. What have you spend 1 year doing if I may ask? Did you previously store passwords in plain text and you had to update that?

Can someone fill me in on why I'm getting downvoted?

Because you're going against the "GDPR BAD" narrative aspiring surveillance capitalists are desperately trying to spin.

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

#167

Post by CiaranMcNulty » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:32 PM UTC

jfk13 wrote: post #61

askmike wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It applies to everyone who wants to serve EU customers. As for startups: depending on what kind of personal data you are collecting, being GDPR complicit shouldn't take more than a day. If it takes longer you are building a business around personal data, and I think you should know your stuff (not just GDPR, but also what kind of data you are collecting and why).

> If it takes longer you are building a business around personal data, and I think you should know your stuff (not just GDPR, but also what kind of data you are collecting and why). And you should probably pause and ask whether your proposed business will provide a net benefit to the world, or if it's just an attempt to make money regardless of the consequences to society. Not to say there aren't any worthwhile busin…

Delete * from user_data doesn't take that long

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

#168

Post by Nasrudith » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:33 PM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #82

kypro wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's absolutely not a small cost. It cost the last startup I worked for around two weeks of development time, plus in many cases it prevents us (or adds massive restrictions) on collecting contact information from leads. It has certainly affected the bottom line of companies like Facebook and Google, but they can afford to take the hit, not all startups can. I'm not really disagree that companies "should" do it. But…

I'm not sure how to react to you implying that it hurts small companies more than big companies, and that it's an impediment to scaling.

Those two aren't mutually exclusive or contradictory - oak trees sprout from acorns. If their growth is stunted then they won't scale.

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

#169

Post by Kurtz79 » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:34 PM UTC

easytiger wrote: post #154

Kurtz79 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could say the same about your own country's government. Do you get a vote over antitrust regulations enacted by your own government? You usually vote a party which might (or not) have a high-level guidelines over a few select policies, but otherwise trust them to make the best decision based on how their political view matches with yours. You elect EU parliament member the same way, and you are free to vote other…

So you think scaling that up to a massive scale where a handful of interests, namely France and Germany, have near complete sway over the agenda makes sense?

France and Germany have the most members, but not nearly enough to take decision by themselves or have control of the agenda.

Besides, the point is moot, because parliament members tend to group themselves based on shared political views, rather than by country.

That countries with more population should have more representation and more weight in the decisions, to me makes sense.

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

#170

Post by peteretep » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 1:36 PM UTC

easytiger wrote: post #153

peteretep wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if that’s why the policies are generally so sensible?

Except that is a fiction you have created because it meets some presupposed view you have. The EU, application of legislation regarding technology is almost entirely designed to attack those companies on the basis they don't recognize revenue in France, Germany.

And you think asking the public for their opinion would mitigate rather than aggravate that?!