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

Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 458 posts

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#301

Post by antonymy »

weatherlite wrote: post #286
antonymy wrote: post #280

The fallout from this should be interesting. This fine is a substantial part (roughly 25%!) of Google's overall revenue from the EMEA region (Europe, Middle East, Africa), of which the EU is probably like 90%, at least, of the total, so it's probably toing the line of actually making the EU unprofitable to Google considering the costs of future compliance to avoid being fined again. Worse: this was not as steep as th…

The EU seems fine with the idea actually - it wants more independence on technology and said so several times. There will be many many pissed off European users for sure but that never stopped the EU elite from making a decision. Still - seems like a reach to me.

I just remember when the EU passed that legislation that made it legal for member states to require Google to pay a fee to newspapers for linking to their content in Google News. Only a few countries bothered to try enforcing it, notably Spain did, and the result was Google called their bluff and de-listed every newspaper in Spain from Google News. It did not take long until Spain relented and permitted newspapers to waive the requirement with exemptions (i.e. allow status quo ante), which is exactly what happened for the bulk of them.

Google definitely wants to stay in this market, but I don't think the EU has as much leverage as they think.

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#302

Post by rsanheim »

moffkalast wrote: post #171
legitster wrote: post #15

So... What's the end result? Google has to charge for Android? Ask users their search preference?

Android should damn well ship with multiple app stores and multiple browsers, not just the GoogleApprovedTM app store where they ban anyone that looks at them wrong or thinks about blocking ads for more than 2 miliseconds. The exclusive app stores are both iOS and Android's greatest strengths and failings at the same time. Apple is arguably the far worse offender there too. If there was an alternative app store on iO…

> If there was an alternative app store on iOS everyone would jump ship immediately

citation needed.

if there was an alternative app store, 90% of apple users wouldn't even be aware of it, the other 8% would hear about it and never use it, and maybe, _maybe_ 2% would install it.

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#303

Post by ranman »

babelfish wrote: post #288
antonymy wrote: post #280

The fallout from this should be interesting. This fine is a substantial part (roughly 25%!) of Google's overall revenue from the EMEA region (Europe, Middle East, Africa), of which the EU is probably like 90%, at least, of the total, so it's probably toing the line of actually making the EU unprofitable to Google considering the costs of future compliance to avoid being fined again. Worse: this was not as steep as th…

To be clear, while the fines might make operating in the EU unprofitable, they could just...follow EU regulations...and remain profitable, albeit at a likely lower margin

EU regulations + individual country restrictions are written in a way that's allergic to running a profitable business (with a few notable exceptions).

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#304

Post by ThatPlayer »

scarface74 wrote: post #174
Normille wrote: post #70

Cool. The EU does have its [many!] faults. But they have a pretty good track record when it comes to consumer rights and consumer choice. Next up I'd like to see them do the same for the plethora of incompatible cordless power-tool systems out there as they did with insisting all mobile phones standardise on a USB connector.

The EU insisting on all phones standardizing on the USB connector is evidence of just the opposite and shows the cluelessness and shortsightness of the EU. You will still have phones that come with “standard USB C” cables where some support different power delivery, data speeds (or not support data transfer at all), very few will support video over USB C (which is standardized), etc. So still when the Android user wi…

Because the mandate is not about phones or data. It's about battery powered devices and charging. I don't need data in the cable for my wireless earbuds, or my battery pack. My toothbrush or my beard trimmer. So that hypothetical USB C cable doesn't have to be thrown away, it can still be used for other devices. Which is why standardization is good.

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#305

Post by mhermher »

Dalewyn wrote: post #228
nilsbunger wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#2 is the same thing Microsoft got busted for by US antitrust in the late 90s. Microsoft had required computer vendors to NOT sell computers with other OSes (eg Linux). At one point they insisted computer vendors pay for a Windows license on all computers they shipped, even ones shipped without Windows.

Is it? My reading of #2 suggests Google just didn't want phones with ancient or beta versions of Android in the market with Google branding. Fairly reasonable demand, if you ask me. #1 is right up the alley that busted Microsoft, though.

Why would a manufacturer sell both devices with ancient and current versions of Android at the same time? There is no reason to limit this behavior because no one would do it. This is entirely about smothering AOSP forks.

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#306

Post by franciscop »

woeh wrote: post #135
Normille wrote: post #70

Cool. The EU does have its [many!] faults. But they have a pretty good track record when it comes to consumer rights and consumer choice. Next up I'd like to see them do the same for the plethora of incompatible cordless power-tool systems out there as they did with insisting all mobile phones standardise on a USB connector.

I was pleased to see recently that a couple of different brands at my local DIY store had interoperable batteries. I bought a small lawnmower which now uses the same battery as a cordless drill from another brand. The brands that joined are listed on their marketing site[0]. Edit: One of the companies has a slightly less obnoxious website which also lists brands[1] [0] https://www.powerforall-alliance.com/en/#technol…

wow this is very interesting, and the main reason I hadn't bought many cordless tools, because I didn't want 2-5 years down the road to have a bunch of chargers and batteries that are all incompatible among each other! I'll reconsider it whenever I need new tools, thanks for sharing!

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#307

Post by mhermher »

dagaci wrote: post #300
guelo wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony is that if Google had not licensed Android and only manufactured its own devices, like Apple does, it could restrict consumer options much more harshly without EU fines and restrictions.

This is true, but the case for the acceptance of Android in the Market was that its was and open-platform and open-source. This is what gave it legs despite its early questionable software and hardware merits (the mantra being that you can fix it yourself!). The slow moving EU, a decade++ later is on target from this point of view. ....

Not even necessarily the "market" of consumers, but more specifically the market of manufacturers.

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#308

Post by yamtaddle »

lioeters wrote: post #276
feanaro wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that surely wouldn't grind everything to a halt and effectively make the existence of non-megacorporations impossible. No, what should instead be done is prevent the existence of these megacorporations which have disproportionate influence on humanity in the first place. Prevent them to form and chop up the existing ones aggressively into smaller ones.

I've long suspected that these "megacorporations" are nurtured for national security reasons, to consolidate and project power. The disproportionate influence is by design, a feature not a flaw. Especially since those who make the rules are owned by such powers themselves, including those responsible for intelligence (corporate spying, undermining workers unions) and regulation (not preventing Metalphabetamazons from…

This has at times been explicit policy. It's a big part of how Japan (re-)joined the developed world so fast after WWII—they gave a few megacorporations a captive home market to keep them healthy & safe, used incentives to get them to pool R&D money and share the output, then set them loose on foreign markets.

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#309

Post by Hamcha »

sangnoir wrote: post #205
Hamcha wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember when Google refused to put Youtube on Windows Phone and when Microsoft made their own client, Google forced them to take it off their own store? Truly advocating for more choice. (Press at the time: https://www.theregister.com/2013/08/16/windows_phone_youtube... )

The Microsoft YT client didn't play ads. All it did was cost YouTube bandwidth without bringing any revenue - there was no way Google was going to let that slide. More broadly, that was also the time Microsoft was going after Android OEMs - never Google directly - threatening them with a secret list of patents that Android allegedly infringed[1]. The settlement almost always resulted in the OEM agreeing to manufactur…

Far from me to want to put Microsoft on a pedestal, but it always felt like neither liked playing fair. WP eventually got a third party Youtube app that kinda stuck for a while, but it was paid (and actually decent) and AFAIK it never got any attention from Google, which to me always felt more like Google was trying to be an ass and protecting their revenue... but mostly their Android revenue.

I was around when Project Astoria almost saw the light of day and I assume Google came back to shoot it down in a similar way (which would be really nice karma given MS patent story)

Re: Google loses EU appeal and is fined a record $4B

#310

Post by mhermher »

cloverich wrote: post #105
Hamcha wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it backward, Amazon and Samsung's own appstores are desperate attempts to get enough traction out of Play Store so that they are not forced to succumb to Google's demands. The issue here isn't Android not being open (which it is), the problem is Google having a lot of control (including full veto power) on devices shipping with Google Play Services, while making them an increasingly necessary part of Android…

Well also, and note its been a while, but when I used non-Google software on the various other phones I've tried (such as Samsung), the first thing I used to do was uninstall all of their software and (if a available) get the Google versions, because they were usually much better. But this isn't new -- back when I was still purchasing Windows machines it was the same way. For whatever reason I just never found an OEM…

It's hard to find value in something that you immediately uninstall.
Post reply on HN