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

European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 702 posts

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#221

Post by apatters »

andmarios wrote: post #20

The press release is well written. It explains why Google is fined in an easy way to understand, covering most aspects; what is the problematic behavior, why it is considered as problematic, which data lead to this decision, etc, whilst not painting the company in a negative light. Opinions on the decision will sure differ among readers, but I think the decision is in place with the majority of EU citizens' consensus…

Take the money Google made by breaking the law and give it to non-profit foundations which are dedicated to developing free/libre alternatives to Google services.

This will kill two birds with one stone--firstly it will correct the economic damage Google has caused by abusing their monopoly position. Secondly it will make it harder for them to maintain and abuse their monopoly in the future.

The software industry today is filled with companies who seek to establish a monopoly so that they can extract monopoly rents. This behavior almost always skirts the boundaries of legality, and it's getting worse. Companies are being created with the explicit business model of throwing huge sums of money at illegal activity in order to establish market dominance--see Uber.

Monopolies are not good for markets and this belief is already reflected in our antitrust laws. We need to give those laws some teeth and come up with creative solutions that don't just punish bad behavior, but also encourage competition.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#222

Post by uhhhhhhh »

karussell wrote: post #33
ruiramos wrote: post #18

Not sure I get the logic here. Will they be fined next for showing the Google Maps embed (and street view) when you search for places nearby? What's the difference?

The funny thing is that Google Maps is even worse than the shopping comparison IMO. But I think the shopping thing got traction as a few competitors bundled their forces and sued them. I like it and hope that Google will stop promoting their services without listing alternatives for lots of things that they promote on the search page (Google Maps, Android, Chrome, Youtube, ...). See 'other cases' in the document that…

My hope is that they provide an opt-in method to bundle in google services.

I want google maps, youtube, shopping links, and largely view the search as a portal to the google platform. Removing this is removing a feature customers and the company wants, because other companies want to compete on individual products that may or may not be better while google is providing a platform with products you want integrated to simplify your life.

I'll take simplicity, trust and reliability over a dozen disconnected services from different companies that I don't know what their motives are. I know googles motives, and as a user of their platform otherwise this service is exactly what I want.

Ultimately my argument is if another company came along and did the exact same thing from the start (integrated platform with search etc...) no one would have an issue. the "Issue" is apparently google's existing search dominance. This is why i think it should be opt-in for users, and by default off. I don't think google is wrong for offering the service to users who want it, competitors have to provide a benefit or product that is so clearly better it offsets the benefits of a more integrated platform. That's the market/competition, not the EU's role.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#223

Post by mythz »

IanCal wrote: post #217
mythz wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By following the rules & regulations set out, which Google will have been fully aware of. There was no previous ruling that indicated that displaying their own relevant content on their own Search pages was illegal. It's absurd to think displaying relevant content in the context of what the User is searching for is illegal, or that they should've been investing resources in helping their competitors get more exposu…

Are you suggesting the ruling is out of line with the regulations? Previous anti-trust rulings seem pretty similar to me. If microsoft gets into trouble for making IE a default browser or bundling windows media player, I'm really not surprised with the way this went. > It's absurd to think displaying relevant content in the context of what the User is searching for is illegal It's not absurd to think that using your…

> Previous anti-trust rulings seem pretty similar to me. If microsoft gets into trouble for making IE a default browser or bundling windows media player, I'm really not surprised with the way this went.

What other Website do you know has been penalized for showing their own content and are being forced to give their competitors prominence? Microsoft had a 95%+ Monopoly on Desktop Operating Systems and wouldn't allow you to remove IE, anyone can easily go to amazon.com, bing.com, ebay.com or visit any other website to do their shopping if they prefer to.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#224

Post by Ensorceled »

The stark dichotomy between the main two views expressed in the commentary is almost breathtaking.

I shouldn't be surprised that so many people support Google using their near monopoly on search to crush their subsidiary's (sibling's ?) competitors in other spheres; after all, I saw people support IBM and Microsoft when they were up to similar shenanigans.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#225

Post by [deleted] »

apatters wrote: post #221
andmarios wrote: post #20

The press release is well written. It explains why Google is fined in an easy way to understand, covering most aspects; what is the problematic behavior, why it is considered as problematic, which data lead to this decision, etc, whilst not painting the company in a negative light. Opinions on the decision will sure differ among readers, but I think the decision is in place with the majority of EU citizens' consensus…

Take the money Google made by breaking the law and give it to non-profit foundations which are dedicated to developing free/libre alternatives to Google services. This will kill two birds with one stone--firstly it will correct the economic damage Google has caused by abusing their monopoly position. Secondly it will make it harder for them to maintain and abuse their monopoly in the future. The software industry tod…

[deleted]

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#226

Post by ko27 »

oyvey wrote: post #212

Visting google is 100% voloutary and there are alternatives. The EU should not interfere, its unnecessary and I think its an abuse of power from their side.

Well that's just your opinion, which is not shared by most people. Definitely not by EU citizens, so it can not be an "abuse of power".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Law

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#227

Post by larma »

theBobBob wrote: post #72

The thing is, personally I prefer getting integrated results from Google's other search services when I do a Google search. I like getting Google Maps results when I search for a location, I like getting Google Flights results etc. When I do a Google search I am not just using it as a simple website search. I want it to use it to search the whole Google suite of services. If they are forced to stop doing this it will…

I think it really depends on the product (e.g. having Google Maps integrated is not a bad idea, because that's what you usually want to access if you enter a address in Google).

But honestly, I don't know anyone that is happy with the Google Products service in Germany. They don't even show links to Amazon here, although they often have the best total price (because of free shipping). I even know a lot of people that go directly to Amazon or a price comparison site because the results presented by Google are so crappy.

As results might be different based on country, region and cookie, here is a screenshot comparing idealo (a large price comparison site) with Google Product search (I just picked this specific product randomly): http://imgur.com/a/MByay

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#228

Post by ocdtrekkie »

codeproject wrote: post #199

I beg everyone answer my question. The anti-trust laws are originated from USA. The anti-monopolies rules are much harsher in US than those of Europe. Why did not federal government pick this up? Since a lot of the companies that are disadvantaged by this Google practice are Us companies. Also I have to agree that this ruling is tough but fair. And the writing is very concise by easy to understand. it is good writing…

It's really simple: Corruption. The former FTC Commissioner, Joshua Wright, was actually paid to fabricate academic studies claiming Google wasn't a monopoly, which Google then used as 'independent' expert testimony. Google's funded about half of Congress in some way or another. Dozens of Googlers held high-ranking positions in the Obama Administration's White House. (Including many relating to tech, such as the head of the Patent and Trademark Office, the White House's CTO, etc.)

Google has invested significant money, resources, and manpower in the United States government, and at least, during the Obama administration, was perceived as an ally to the general agenda. We have yet to see how much changes under Trump, the rumor is Joshua Wright is already back involved with the FTC, but the Trump administration has lagged on actually getting all these agencies re-staffed, and who knows what'll actually happen: https://theintercept.com/2016/11/15/google-gets-a-seat-on-th...

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#229

Post by nkkollaw »

3pt14159 wrote: post #109
nkkollaw wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I read, AMP is a subset of HTML to make pages load faster and deliver ads more efficiently (which might appeal to content creators). I assume that Google is attempting to make devs start using a proprietary technology instead of the well-established HTML standard, or: - somehow lock everyone in with the format - force people to switch to Chrome since it would run those pages better - force other browsers to…

AMP isn't bad in the sense that it makes websites faster. AMP is bad because it (usually, in common practice) switches the domain, so you lose control of a huge number of things and you essentially cede control to a third party, so instead of this: https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/07/us/politics/hillary-cl... You get this: https://amp.gstatic.com/v/mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/07/us/p... Now ironically, this is actua…

Ah, I had no idea that the implementation required you to proxy everything through Google, I thought all you had to do was changing the code.

I would never do that.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#230

Post by nkkollaw »

helb wrote: post #116
nkkollaw wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I read, AMP is a subset of HTML to make pages load faster and deliver ads more efficiently (which might appeal to content creators). I assume that Google is attempting to make devs start using a proprietary technology instead of the well-established HTML standard, or: - somehow lock everyone in with the format - force people to switch to Chrome since it would run those pages better - force other browsers to…

This might be worth reading: https://www.alexkras.com/i-decided-to-disable-amp-on-my-site... (on HN yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14635013 )

Thanks, added it to Pocket.
Post reply on HN