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

European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 702 posts

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

#561

Post by ferongr »

jazoom wrote: post #258
dustinmoris wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? This is the company who initiated the lawsuit: http://www.foundem.co.uk/ By looking at the website do you think they were disadvantaged in Google search because of Google's monopoly or perhaps for MANY other reasons? I mean it doesn't even render on mobile...

I guess it's stuck in 2008 because they've made no money since then?

I doubt it. We have a price aggregator (skroutz.gr) here in Greece that people prefer because it's actually useful. The above site doesn't look like that.

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

#562

Post by bahjoite »

dustinmoris wrote: post #187
distances wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very cynical view. As an European citizen I expect my representatives not to engage in such childish schemes even if it's about considerable sums. I think the provided explanation is clear and the punishment reasonable.

Are you sure? This is the company who initiated the lawsuit: http://www.foundem.co.uk/ By looking at the website do you think they were disadvantaged in Google search because of Google's monopoly or perhaps for MANY other reasons? I mean it doesn't even render on mobile...

Of which lawsuit do you speak? From [1]:-

> The European Commission has decided to open an antitrust investigation into allegations that Google Inc. has abused a dominant position in online search, in violation of European Union rules (Article 102 TFEU). The opening of formal proceedings follows complaints by search service providers about unfavourable treatment of their services in Google's unpaid and sponsored search results coupled with an alleged preferential placement of Google's own services. This initiation of proceedings does not imply that the Commission has proof of any infringements. It only signifies that the Commission will conduct an in-depth investigation of the case as a matter of priority.

[1]: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-10-1624_en.htm?local...

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

#563

Post by ferongr »

ionised wrote: post #278
vixen99 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europeans could always use one of the other (European?) search engines if so they wished. http://searchengineland.com/alternatives-to-google-in-europe...

Or Google could follow the rules of the countries in which they operate.

Please quote the rule that Google broke. In all 28 EU countries.

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

#564

Post by ferongr »

ionised wrote: post #279
oyvey wrote: post #212

Visting google is 100% voloutary and there are alternatives. The EU should not interfere, its unnecessary and I think its an abuse of power from their side.

That's a very US-centric viewpoint and not one shared by people in Europe.

I share it. What now?

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

#565

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

tripzilch wrote: post #534
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define monopoly, Google is the largest search engine, Amazon is the largest eretailer. Personally I don't think Google has a monopoly, as there are alternatives (a monopoly is supposed to be when their exist no competitors, not just when a business is so much better than everyone else that people choose to use them). Plus, switching search engines takes literally seconds. Amazon used to only push other's products, no…

The term "market domination" is actually the one under consideration with this ruling. Previous time this happening with Microsoft, they just happened to also be a monopoly. "Market domination" is in fact defined in the article (and in more specific detail if you follow the links there).

I believe I said monopoly, not market domination. Thanks though.

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

#566

Post by vkou »

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.

Google isn't a charity, and is under no obligation to serve Europe. It's in Europe, and will remain in Europe because it is profitable to remain there.

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

#567

Post by jazoom »

ferongr wrote: post #561
jazoom wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess it's stuck in 2008 because they've made no money since then?

I doubt it. We have a price aggregator (skroutz.gr) here in Greece that people prefer because it's actually useful. The above site doesn't look like that.

It was kind of a joke in reference to the article. I also run an Australian price aggregator and it doesn't look like that: https://pricehipster.com

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

#568

Post by vkou »

jpttsn wrote: post #421
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps obvious was not a good choice. Anyways: I would say Google is as close to a natural monopoly as the Bell System was in 1956. If you came to me and said “Hey, I want to start a company to compete with Google in search,” I would say you’re out of your mind and don’t waste your energy or your time or your money, there’s just no way. Classic economics would say that if there’s a business in which there are 35 per…

What makes a natural monopoly different from a monopoly? How did Google displace previous search engines?

A natural monopoly has a positive feedback loop, where monopoly profits can be used to lock out competitors. This is typically due to network effects.

Building roads is an example of a natural monopoly. Consumer internet is an example of a natural monopoly. Growing corn is not a natural monopoly.

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

#569

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

petre wrote: post #540

It's just a covert trade war with the US. The US fines VW, then the EU fines Google and Facebook and maybe Apple too. I don't like Google's practices or their ad network but this is just about taxes and clawing back some money after Google used Ireland and the Caymans to avoid paying some taxes in the EU. In the UK they got a slap on the back last year - some 300M in back taxes.

* The US fined VW fair and square. VW has a large North American business anyway - there is no significant US/EU "trade war". Besides, American car manufacturers like GM are also implicated: https://electrek.co/2017/05/25/gm-dieselgate-scandal/

* Ireland is in the EU and contributes towards the EU's coffers.

* The EU is also going after VW ( http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/eu-sues-germ... ), but the responsibility in this case lies with individual member-state governments, rather than any single EU organ, and there is evidence that VW carefully gamed the situation so their defeat-devices were technically legal in the EU ( https://www.ft.com/content/0b9bf1d2-e486-11e6-9645-c9357a758... )

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

#570

Post by dragonwriter »

vkou wrote: post #568
jpttsn wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes a natural monopoly different from a monopoly? How did Google displace previous search engines?

A natural monopoly has a positive feedback loop, where monopoly profits can be used to lock out competitors. This is typically due to network effects. Building roads is an example of a natural monopoly. Consumer internet is an example of a natural monopoly. Growing corn is not a natural monopoly.

> Growing corn is not a natural monopoly.

In the absence of a third-party with IP rights on seed, dominating corn growing means you dominate the seed supply and have the most variety to select from for improved traits (whether yield, hardiness to particular environmental stresses, etc.)

Seems to have a pretty clear feedback loop where dominance breeds dominance in the same way as with network effects. Sure, the source of the feedback loop is different, but it's very much there.

Post reply on HN