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

441–450 of 975 posts

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

#441

Post by antr »

simongray wrote: post #292
antr wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This fine isn't about monopoly. But Google: - has required manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search app and browser app (Chrome), as a condition for licensing Google's app store (the Play Store); - made payments to certain large manufacturers and mobile network operators on condition that they exclusively pre-installed the Google Search app on their devices; and - has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-inst…

Yes, it is. Straight from the press release: > Market dominance is, as such, not illegal under EU antitrust rules. However, dominant companies have a special responsibility not to abuse their powerful market position by restricting competition, either in the market where they are dominant or in separate markets. > Google has engaged in three separate types of practices, which all had the aim of cementing Google's dom…

You said it "Market dominance is, as such, not illegal under EU antitrust rules." It isn't about a monopoly, it's about abusing power.

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

#442

Post by trasz »

bjpbakker wrote: post #428
endorphone wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there aren't because BMW absolutely squashed the possibility of that at the outset. But Google, apparently, deserves a $5B fine because they made a mistake of powering AOSP phones, the Amazon products, countless variations in China, set top boxes, etc. It is incredible seeing Google being seriously attacked on here for have an open source path as well. I feel like this is some sort of alternative universe.

> Google being seriously attacked on here for have an open source path as well It's not because Google has open sourced Android (which they _had_ to because of the GPL used by Linux). The fine is for protecting their own marker by blocking others from using that open source software.

Minor nit: Google didn't have to Open Source the whole Android because of Linux; Linux is just one of many components, and Linux' license doesn't apply to the rest of the software there.

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

#443

Post by delecti »

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?

Google is imposing terms on third party manufacturers. What third parties are selling devices with iOS?

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

#444

Post by eastendguy »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #437
Dayshine wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And if we just go around clubbing everything coarsely, why does my BMW have a BMW entertainment system Because BMW don't have market dominance in either the car industry or the entertainment system industry. If they used dominance in one to affect the other, they would be in breach of that legislation. >This is absolutely not at all clear cut. It is incredibly nuanced So how do you explain Google's non-compliance wh…

So it's only against the law once the company becomes big enough? If, for example, BMW _did_ become an extremely successful car manufacturer to the point where they were capturing >80% of the market, would they suddenly no longer be allowed to bundle their own entertainment system with their cars?

Exactly. That is the whole point of anti-monopoly laws.

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

#445

Post by stopshadowbans »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #437
Dayshine wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And if we just go around clubbing everything coarsely, why does my BMW have a BMW entertainment system Because BMW don't have market dominance in either the car industry or the entertainment system industry. If they used dominance in one to affect the other, they would be in breach of that legislation. >This is absolutely not at all clear cut. It is incredibly nuanced So how do you explain Google's non-compliance wh…

So it's only against the law once the company becomes big enough? If, for example, BMW _did_ become an extremely successful car manufacturer to the point where they were capturing >80% of the market, would they suddenly no longer be allowed to bundle their own entertainment system with their cars?

Yes? When you’re in a dominant position in a market you’re subjected to a different set of rules. This is to help keep even a captured market competitive.

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

#446

Post by orf »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #437
Dayshine wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And if we just go around clubbing everything coarsely, why does my BMW have a BMW entertainment system Because BMW don't have market dominance in either the car industry or the entertainment system industry. If they used dominance in one to affect the other, they would be in breach of that legislation. >This is absolutely not at all clear cut. It is incredibly nuanced So how do you explain Google's non-compliance wh…

So it's only against the law once the company becomes big enough? If, for example, BMW _did_ become an extremely successful car manufacturer to the point where they were capturing >80% of the market, would they suddenly no longer be allowed to bundle their own entertainment system with their cars?

No, they would be able to bundle their own entertainment system with their cars, but they would not be able to force anyone else who wants to use their engines in their cars to bundle the entertainment system as well, as a contractual precondition to be able to use those engines.

Of course the size of the company and the market dominance comes into play here. It's not a monopoly if people can go elsewhere to get their engines, it is if there is only one realistic choice of supplier (Android).

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

#447

Post by therealmarv »

oblio wrote: post #148
therealmarv wrote: post #96

History is repeating itself. Only difference is that Google search and Chrome browser is not as bad as MSN and IE in former times. Why Google did not looked on how MS handled that issue when you become the market leader?

Because crime at that level pays and we're talking $$$. The fine is just a slap on the wrist in the overall scheme of things.

I somehow doubt it pays more than 5 billion dollars. I mean, even when I had the option I would use Google search and Google Chrome anyway and I think many other people too.

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

#448

Post by JimmaDaRustla »

swebs wrote: post #295

>In particular, Google has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called "Android forks"). Sounds a lot how Microsoft abused licensing agreements with OEMs to discourage them from selling PCs not bundled with Windows. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_of_Microsoft_Win…

Does it not sound hypocritical to sue a corporation for pre-installing software (Microsoft installing IE on Windows) and also suing another corporation for not allowing software to be pre-installed?

I also wonder how they come up with the multi-billion dollar values? How does that massive amount of money actually help repair whatever "economical damage" that was inflicted by not having some sort of app pre-installed on a device?

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

#449

Post by typon »

dlp211 wrote: post #382
typon wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google had gone the open source route out of the goodness of their hearts, you'd have an argument. Google went the open source route to bootstrap on top of a well known operating system (Linux), as well as to accelerate adoption and catch up to Apple as fast as they could. Then once they got market dominance, they abused their position to stifle competition.

There is nothing that you said that requires Android to be open source.

I think Android's popularity and extremely quick adoption owes itself to the fact that it's open source.

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

#450

Post by 39d3493I93 »

endorphone wrote: post #286

This is a dangerous ruling that pushes the world further into the potential for trade wars by proxy. Contrary to numerous posts- -no, the law isn't "clear". This is an incredibly nuanced situation, and the notion that Google was just overtly flouting (ed: thx sjcsjc) the law is outright nonsense. Google has a huge litany of bad practices (I personally recently switched my daily driver to an iPhone for that reason), b…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN