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

U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 266 posts

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#231

Post by midoridensha »

brookst wrote: post #223
postalrat wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then their first target should be Apple.

I've never understood this kind of "regulators should ignore evidence of wrongdoing as long as there is also evidence of someone else engaging in wrongdoing" thinking. Even granting that Apple is super-mega-unbearably evil, do you really think regulators should serialize investigations and actions, only moving on to the #2 worst offender once the #1 is sorted?

>do you really think regulators should serialize investigations and actions, only moving on to the #2 worst offender once the #1 is sorted?

Actually, yes. Because if they take down the #2 worst offender, that leaves #1 as the default option for consumers, and strengthens #1's position at #2's expense. It makes the problem even worse than before.

As a consumer who doesn't want to use Apple devices, and uses Google because that's basically the only other option for many things, anything that greatly harms Google harms me. Take down Apple and create more competition, and then I'll have more options and I'll be able to maybe choose some things other than Google. After Apple is broken apart, then Google becomes the #1 problem, so go after them at that time. (Yes, I know this particular case probably won't have that much effect on Google.)

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#233

Post by nr2x »

basch wrote: post #15
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #2

https://archive.ph/vJYU2 I hope something comes of this, but other than a change in administration, what's new on this in the last decade? Hasn't Google essentially controlled most of online advertising for eons? In fact, perhaps more recently Facebook/Meta has chipped into that market more than how things were 8-10 years ago. I was part of an acquisition that Google made in the ad-tech industry back in 2011 and ther…

In 2017, Lina M. Khan, at the age of 27, published Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox. It said everyone was getting antitrust wrong, and there were other ways giant conglomerates were harming competition. Traditionally, unless the consumer was harmed through short term price fixing, just about anything was allowed to fly. The paper took the legal world by storm, and two years ago, she was nominated, confirmed, and appointed…

This is DOJ.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#234

Post by midoridensha »

minhazm wrote: post #152
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it means you have enough control of the market to artificially affect/set the market price for something Does it? Then why isn't every App Store's 30% developer fee a much more obvious monopoly?

I think in the case of Apple it's more difficult to challenge due to the existence of Android. iOS doesn't even have 50% of the market mobile OS market share globally. You can argue Apple has a monopoly on their own products, but then we'd need to also discuss the same for Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo, and any other device that has its own marketplace.

I'm not sure about the stats on gaming consoles, but Apple has over 50% marketshare in the US last I checked, and we're talking about US law here so US marketshare is really more important than how many Android phones people in India and China have. So having a majority of the market which almost everyone these days buys from (almost everyone has a smartphone now, not like gaming consoles which are a niche market), and then forcing everyone with an iDevice to use the Apple App store, is a clear monopoly unlike some gaming console that a small single-digit percentage of the population (or less) owns, and competes with 2 other big competitors, is not the same.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#235

Post by nr2x »

basch wrote: post #54
__derek__ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small nit: the suit in TFA is from the DOJ, not the FTC.

They work in tandem. The FTC shares jurisdiction over federal civil antitrust enforcement with the Department of Justice Antitrust Division. In some consumer protection matters, the FTC appears with, or supports, the U.S. Department of Justice. Biden's FTC appointments are redefining FTC perspective on anti-trust, and DOJ is following suit.

Not on this case, this is from Trump Era. Lina was still a professor.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#236

Post by midoridensha »

makapuf wrote: post #174
jefftk wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the article and skimming the suit, it's only about ads on the general web ("display ads"), not ads on search pages.

There are ads on websites ?

Honestly, I'm surprised the US government hasn't tried to ban ad-blocking yet.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#237

Post by nr2x »

basch wrote: post #72
from wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lina M. Khan, at the age of 27, published Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox Is this a puff piece? She's just some government employee - she doesn't produce anything. It remains to be seen whether her aggressive interpretation of antitrust law will actually benefit consumers. We can split up Google into 100 companies and then we'll find out that the bales of cash advertising produces are no longer subsidizing the less prof…

I was casually pointing out someone comparatively green was in charge now, as opposed to an experienced tenured dogmatic bureaucrat. I left it ambiguous whether inexperience would be a boon to free thinking and a new era or a hinderance and burden to the economy. Maybe things have been being done the way they were "always" done, for a reason. Take it as a rorschach test.

Except she isn’t. You’re totally incorrect on all your comments.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#238

Post by EarlKing »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #221
EarlKing wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current court was preceded by a far less conservative court which did precisely dick about the problem for decades. Stop trying to frame this as a party issue when this is a class issue -- and the bourgeoisie controls both sides of the aisle.

I linked to a summary of a UVA paper evaluating the SC decisions of the last century or so and graphing them as pro or anti-corporatist, which concluded that the current court is the most pro-business ever. You have handwaved that it maybe used to be this bad. If you have some sort of basis for your belief, I would be happy to consider it.

The basis of my belief is the undeniable fact that prior courts didn't do a damn thing about it despite decades of opportunities. This simply isn't a partisan issue, no matter how much certain petit bourgeoisie-aligned persons would like to frame it otherwise. This is entirely about the uniparty protecting its class interest in ensuring monopolies are not confronted -- unless they pissed off the wrong party member, of course.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#239

Post by from »

nr2x wrote: post #237
basch wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was casually pointing out someone comparatively green was in charge now, as opposed to an experienced tenured dogmatic bureaucrat. I left it ambiguous whether inexperience would be a boon to free thinking and a new era or a hinderance and burden to the economy. Maybe things have been being done the way they were "always" done, for a reason. Take it as a rorschach test.

Except she isn’t. You’re totally incorrect on all your comments.

He is talking about how the prevailing attitude towards antitrust in the executive branch has changed. Lina Khan is a symbol and motivator of that change. Not sure what you're talking about.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#240

Post by xvector »

jessaustin wrote: post #109
xvector wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works through frivolous lawsuits attempting to block everything Big Tech does regardless of reason, eg the acquisition of Within, which has no justifiable antitrust case whatsoever.

Within is an app developer whose apps compete with apps owned by Meta, run on hardware owned by Meta, and are sold in an app store owned by Meta. Why does this confuse you?

There is no viable anticompetitive case for VR as it is a nascent industry which barely exists. Furthermore, Meta is far from the only player in the VR space today - Valve, Pico, HTC, Samsung, and Microsoft amongst others all play a role in the VR ecosystem.
Post reply on HN