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

European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 975 posts

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#221

Post by sqdbps »

r_singh wrote: post #169
hrktb wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better source: > The European Commission has accused Google of abusing its Android market dominance by bundling its search engine and Chrome apps into the operating system. Google has also allegedly blocked phone makers from creating devices that run forked versions of Android. https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/18/17580694/google-android-e... > How is it any different Apple doesn’t have a dominent search engine to pu…

Thanks for this. Anyone who has tried to compile a forked version of AOSP knows that Google makes it extremely hard to do so. Android being an open source OS is nowhere near as easy to install as a regular linux open source OS. I've been trying to get my own android / androidTV box working on popular hardware like rPi and other Amlogic, Allwinner, Mali based boards without much success. Even devices manufacturers hav…

Tell that to Amazon and their Fire devices and to all the Android forks in China.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#223

Post by sheeshkebab »

bwb wrote: post #61

This one frustrated me to read, i think they should have gotten involved sooner and worked with google. Instead they slap a crazy high fee for something that is vague in violation. It does feel a bit like a vendetta here by the EU.

According to the article they tried to work with google on this for 2 years, and it’s still not a final decision - google can appeal.

Although, they should have put a fine of $12b (all of googles yearly earnings), effective immediate, and double it every year until non competitive practices ended.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#224

Post by r_singh »

ensiferum wrote: post #219
r_singh wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for this. Anyone who has tried to compile a forked version of AOSP knows that Google makes it extremely hard to do so. Android being an open source OS is nowhere near as easy to install as a regular linux open source OS. I've been trying to get my own android / androidTV box working on popular hardware like rPi and other Amlogic, Allwinner, Mali based boards without much success. Even devices manufacturers hav…

Android is only open in theory, closed in practice.

AOSP does not include proprietary apps like the Play Store, etc.

In order for device manufacturers to get the Play Store on their phone, they have to give in to Google's demands to add the Google search box on the home screen of the phones.

Apart from this, Qualcomm doesn't release open source drivers for GPUs etc, making it even harder to use pure AOSP on flagship devices.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#225

Post by close04 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #127
close04 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the fines are lower than the expected benefit from your "wrongdoing" then what's the incentive to stop? As a person getting caught stealing/defrauding/etc. you would have to pay restitution and additional fines/time in prison. This is how it should work for businesses to. If the goal is to actually prevent future abuse.

You would have to record every single conversation to pin intent on specific individuals. This is one big advantage of being concentrated in cities, you can meet face to face with people and discuss things without fear of legal repercussions.

That wasn't my point. I'm not talking about assigning blame on individuals in a company but to at least use the same principles when punishing companies as we do with individuals.

A private individual is expected to return all illegal gains, pay additional fines, and possibly do prison.

But a company might be expected to pay fines that are actually a fraction of the profits made abusing the law. This means paying the fine is more lucrative business than ceasing the abusive behavior.

As such the system only gives the appearance that it's working when in reality it's just not bringing the expected benefits. If paying the fine and keep skirting the law is cheaper than fully complying than that's what companies will do.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#226

Post by pandem »

cncrnd wrote: post #81

This line in the article got to me, "The fine would top the EU’s €2.4 billion antitrust decision against Google just over a year ago." It looks like the EU has created a piggy bank with these regulations on hostage tech corporations. I wonder how much of the large fines is attributed to prosecutors or politicians trying to make a name for themselves. Anyone know how often these record fines hold up on appeal? Edit: W…

https://money.cnn.com/2014/06/30/investing/bnp-paribas-sanct... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/16/deutsche-ba... https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/04/21/volkswag...

As if this doesn't happen on the other side of the pond. Claiming only EU does this is intellectual dishonesty

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#227

Post by [deleted] »

vivan wrote: post #2

Can anyone concisely explain what this fine is for, and also why the same wouldn't apply to Apple for iOS? It seems to be a rehash of the issue that Microsoft faced when it only gave you Internet Explorer on install. But iOS comes with only Safari on install, and forces you to use Apple's various apps - how is this any different?

[deleted]

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#228

Post by lucb1e »

theBobBob wrote: post #103

Very slightly off topic but I actually think how Android handles default apps is the best of both worlds. It comes with very very good default Google Apps that work well together but it is very easy to switch out whatever you want for an alternative. How iOS handles it is the opposite. For their default apps they either straight out not allow competitors, severely limit what their competitors or (if I remember correc…

> but it is very easy to switch out whatever you want for an alternative

Do tell how one could switch out the map from Google Maps to anything else (Bing, OpenStreetMap, whatever).

Or how I could get rid of Google+ without needing to wipe my device or use a zero-day.

Or perhaps how I could get apk files from their repository without agreeing to the Google TOS and privacy policy, and without using some hacky system like Yalp store that breaks every couple of weeks for a little while.

This is definitely not easy to swap out. I bet that even from the top 10% of tech-savvy people on hacker news, there's 9%. that cannot figure out how to remove google completely within a normal working day of 8 hours.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#229

Post by close04 »

detaro wrote: post #215
thrillgore wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After GDPR? I'm seeing the EU as a sizable liability that hands out fines like candy. Blocking them doesn't seem like a crazy idea.

On what data do you base your judgement that GDPR means the EU "hands out fines like candy"?

If anything they're not handing out enough fines. Companies just pay them and keep doing shady business because it's financially more sound to keep abusing the system. Paying the fine is cheaper than correcting their business practices.

Re: European Commission fines Google €4.34B in Android antitrust case

#230

Post by r_singh »

sqdbps wrote: post #221
r_singh wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for this. Anyone who has tried to compile a forked version of AOSP knows that Google makes it extremely hard to do so. Android being an open source OS is nowhere near as easy to install as a regular linux open source OS. I've been trying to get my own android / androidTV box working on popular hardware like rPi and other Amlogic, Allwinner, Mali based boards without much success. Even devices manufacturers hav…

Tell that to Amazon and their Fire devices and to all the Android forks in China.

Android forks in China are not undermined by the lacking open driver support for Android.

There's a bunch of SBC manufacturers (pine64, odroid, orangepi, etc) worldwide that have managed to compile AOSP for questionable hardware. However, it is noteworthy that almost none have been able to compile images for Android 7.1 and above that work without hiccups.

Post reply on HN