European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance • Hacker News Board

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

#431

Post by throwawaymanbot » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:06 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #312

throwaway2016a wrote: post #275

I might be in a minority here and I'll probably get down voted but this result scares me... and I used to be CTO one of those competing price comparison sites that show up lower in the results so if anyone should agree it should be me. While it made me angry when Google put their results above ours, I never questioned that they had a right to do that. It is their website. They are not a utility. At what point does a…

It should scare you. The EU just used their regulatory power to force the world's biggest search engine to make their user experience worse in order to benefit other companies. Before Google penalized all the vertical search sites, doing a Google search for certain kinds of products was a terrible experience; page after page of crappy information-free autogenerated sites hoping to make $$$ from ads and referral fees…

So really you are angry at Microsoft, not the EU.

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

#432

Post by throwawaymanbot » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:08 PM UTC

Ajedi32 wrote: post #354

denis1 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you should be happy, that the EU actually uses their regulatory power to benefit the consumer no matter how big the company they're going against is.

Does it benefit the consumer though? I fail to see how showing links to search results pages from other companies in response to a product query is better for consumers than just showing them a listing of the products they actually searched for. [Google's response][1] to this ruling suggests they have data which confirms this: > While some comparison shopping sites naturally want Google to show them more prominently,…

I feel it does benefit the consumer. You are assuming that google is going to show me the best search results etc for my query, while in reality they are displaying what suits them and their advertiser better.

Which is great for google, not exactly great for my interests however.

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

#433

Post by stickfigure » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:13 PM UTC

zdkl wrote: post #367

Ajedi32 wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it benefit the consumer though? I fail to see how showing links to search results pages from other companies in response to a product query is better for consumers than just showing them a listing of the products they actually searched for. [Google's response][1] to this ruling suggests they have data which confirms this: > While some comparison shopping sites naturally want Google to show them more prominently,…

As a consumer, I have (much) more trust that my interests are advanced by the EU than google. This is an opinion which I don't feel the need to convert anyone to but I really don't understand the opposite view. Can someone explain why they believe google and other "emerging" power centers saveguard their interests better than the EU?

As a consumer, I have (much) more trust that my interests are advanced by the EU than google.

The same people that brought you that idiotic cookies warning?

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

#434

Post by throwawaymanbot » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:14 PM UTC

What is annoying about this all, is that the EU picks on tech companies a lot. They seem to do absolutely NOTHING about the financial houses, that got away with an awful lot during the greatest financial crisis the world has ever seen, as an example.

It would be much better for consumers if the EU applied their fines to more "dangerous to society" type outfits, that can actually do and have done immense damage to economies not just in the EU, but the US and rest of the world.

The EU should apply consumer concern to the banking/finance sector in equal measure as they do with Tech firms. After all, Google cannot crash a society, But the Banking/financial sector can and has done.

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

#435

Post by grondilu » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:14 PM UTC

matt4077 wrote: post #414

grondilu wrote: post #315

Maybe it's time Google enters politics, gains control of the US army somehow, and then threatens to invade Europe if they ever bother them again.

Maybe Google is run by people far above idiotic nationalistic revenge fantasies such as this.

Two billion dollars is a lot of money. Maybe enough to consider all possible means to avoid paying them.

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

#436

Post by s73ver » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:16 PM UTC

Ajedi32 wrote: post #354

denis1 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you should be happy, that the EU actually uses their regulatory power to benefit the consumer no matter how big the company they're going against is.

Does it benefit the consumer though? I fail to see how showing links to search results pages from other companies in response to a product query is better for consumers than just showing them a listing of the products they actually searched for. [Google's response][1] to this ruling suggests they have data which confirms this: > While some comparison shopping sites naturally want Google to show them more prominently,…

"Does it benefit the consumer though?"

Isn't one of the big refrains here that competition always benefits the consumer?

This situation makes me think of the larger markets: We're wanting the short term benefit (Google prioritizing their results over others) at the expense of the long term benefit (healthy competition in the travel space).

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

#437

Post by literallycancer » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:18 PM UTC

oskbor wrote: post #389

ko27 wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'll probably get down voted Damn, I hate this trend of making you comments appear more controversial. > What's next? You really should not argue this point. We need to stop "big" companies doing "anti-consumer" practices. The reason why those terms are in quotation marks is because when you are discussing antitrust and monopoly laws those terms are not well defined. You should only look at these rulings per-case b…

Don't pretend to speak for "EU citizens". What have we got to do with Brussels and Microsoft stealing money from Google? Google is not a utility, it is a product company and you are free to use other companies products

EU citizens vote in their national elections. EC members are nominated by national governments. If your government appointed someone that you feel doesn't represent your interests and you feel strongly about it, you should vote for someone else in the next election. This is exactly how representative democracy should work.

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

#438

Post by tripzilch » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

us0r wrote: post #352

throwaway2016a wrote: post #275

I might be in a minority here and I'll probably get down voted but this result scares me... and I used to be CTO one of those competing price comparison sites that show up lower in the results so if anyone should agree it should be me. While it made me angry when Google put their results above ours, I never questioned that they had a right to do that. It is their website. They are not a utility. At what point does a…

>I might be in a minority here Nope. It's crazy. You don't go to the most popular restaurant in town and have them tell you to go get desert across the street because the superior food and experience hurt their sales. Even looking at the commissions fact sheet (Search Engine market share) [0]. 3 of the 4 other companies are billion dollar enterprises. Microsoft decided to make it difficult to switch to Chrome/Google…

> Nope. It's crazy. You don't go to the most popular restaurant in town and have them tell you to go get desert across the street because the superior food and experience hurt their sales.

Which is why they determined Google's market dominance in Search, not shopping sites.

Your analogy should be about the single most popular restaurant guide in town, opening up their own restaurant and then only writing reviews for that.

The quality of Google's in-house shopping business didn't factor into the EU Commission's rulings at all. Which makes a lot of sense because, given Google's market dominance in Search, it is impossible to know if their shopping business is in fact superior or not, because they abused that power (gained from Search, not building a superior shopping business) to stifle any competition.

As the article clearly states, market dominance is not illegal (like your restaurant analogy suggests), irresponsibly abusing the power that comes with it is.

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

#439

Post by s73ver » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:25 PM UTC

jabv wrote: post #317

bjl wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you gain a certain amount of market share you no longer have the right to engage in certain kinds of anti-competitive actions. There's nothing extreme about that; the laws have been in place for over a century.

"It is generally conceded in our age that a critically strategic producer has an obligation to the public for the sake of the common good." And what happens if Google says, "f * it, we're not providing a utility, we're not taking traffic from European IPs anymore"? I am no anarcho-capitalist, but I really think more folks should read Atlas Shrugged.

Then let them. And then the shareholders and the board would rise up against whoever decided to have Google "go Galt", because they know that they make far more money in Europe than not being in Europe.

Very rarely does acting like a child and "taking your ball and go home" work out.

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

#440

Post by mtgx » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 4:26 PM UTC

throwaway2016a wrote: post #275

I might be in a minority here and I'll probably get down voted but this result scares me... and I used to be CTO one of those competing price comparison sites that show up lower in the results so if anyone should agree it should be me. While it made me angry when Google put their results above ours, I never questioned that they had a right to do that. It is their website. They are not a utility. At what point does a…

Okay, but what about when Google actively demotes you, so its products do even better? Are you okay with that, too, because "it's their website", or do you expect more from a "search engine company"?

> Google has demoted rival comparison shopping services in its search results: rival comparison shopping services appear in Google's search results on the basis of Google's generic search algorithms. Google has included a number of criteria in these algorithms, as a result of which rival comparison shopping services are demoted. Evidence shows that even the most highly ranked rival service appears on average only on page four of Google's search results, and others appear even further down. Google's own comparison shopping service is not subject to Google's generic search algorithms, including such demotions.

> As a result, Google's comparison shopping service is much more visible to consumers in Google's search results, whilst rival comparison shopping services are much less visible.

Your comment reads like you haven't even read the EC press release. I suggest you do that first.