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

571–580 of 975 posts

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

#571

Post by endorphone »

itsmenotyou wrote: post #461
wongarsu wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They're a part of the same suite of apps that provide the "Android experience" The thing they were fined for was >[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); How is the Play Store related to the Google Seach app or to Chrome? One is an app store, one is a seach bar and one is a browser. They have…

> How is the Play Store related to the Google Seach app or to Chrome? - They're not, and the attempt to claim they are part of a mobile "suite" is the same sort of obfuscation Microsoft used when they argued a web browser (IE) was an essential part of a desktop OS. This ruling seems obvious to me.

So good of you to cut right through the nuance.

But of course to an Android buyer, it is all a part of the experience with the device. They know what to expect and what is there.

"he same sort of obfuscation Microsoft used when they argued a web browser"

And Microsoft was right. Windows has Explorer or Edge. It still does. The EU giant fine did absolutely nothing but made them realize that cashing in big on American companies is essentially free. Of course I still download Firefox, just as you can do on Android.

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

#572

Post by Andrex »

To play devil's advocate, Google's had these rules in place since Android released. It may be hard to visualize but Android started with 0% market share like everyone else. The tools Google used in Android's early days to rein in fragmentation (meaning what the EU is fining them for today) were effective but Google was still lambasted about not doing enough back then.

The only thing that's changed from then to today is Android's market share. I'm not so sure taking away Google's ability to fight fragmentation is necessarily a good thing for consumers or developers.

It'll certainly please OEMs and telcos, though.

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

#573

Post by sjwright »

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?

> why the same wouldn't apply to Apple for iOS?

Microsoft got into trouble because they forced companies like Dell and HP to make their products feature Internet Explorer.

Google is getting into trouble now because they're forcing companies like Samsung and LG to make their products feature Chrome.

Apple is not getting into trouble now because Apple is not forcing Apple to make their products feature Safari. Obviously iOS does feature Safari, but Apple was free to make that choice. There is no OEM here being bullied.

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

#574

Post by AnthonyMouse »

DenisM wrote: post #487
JimmaDaRustla wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The question is whether manufacturers had a choice, and the problem is that they did not because monopoly. Massive fines discourage monopolistic behavior, if nothing else.

> Massive fines discourage monopolistic behavior, if nothing else.

The problem is businesses may take it as a signal that the EU is against foreign businesses rather than against monopolistic practices, in which case the thing being deterred is doing business in the EU rather than monopolistic practices. To show otherwise they would have to levy equally large fines against local businesses engaged in the same sort of practices, which they haven't and likely won't.

If they really wanted to signal discouragement of monopolistic behavior rather than a cash grab they would be ordering specific conduct rather than excessive fines. For example, if the issue is that they promoted Google Chrome in an unacceptable way, prohibit them from distributing Google Chrome in the EU for five years. And then do the same thing to Microsoft just to be even-handed, because they're still bundling their browser with Windows. And likewise with Apple and Safari.

Let everyone use Firefox for five years and see how much browser bundling happens after that.

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

#575

Post by indemnity »

davb wrote: post #239
theBobBob wrote: post #103

Very slightly off topic but I actually think how Android handles default apps is the best of both worlds. It comes with very very good default Google Apps that work well together but it is very easy to switch out whatever you want for an alternative. How iOS handles it is the opposite. For their default apps they either straight out not allow competitors, severely limit what their competitors or (if I remember correc…

I've noticed that on iOS, Google can be quite pushy with regards to their apps. No matter how many times I click "don't ask me again", Hangouts always asks if I want to install Chrome whenever I try to open a web link (in Safari). And I get constant nags on Gmail web to install Gmail on my iPhone to "get the full experience" (as opposed to using the bundled iOS Mail app).

Noticed that today. I’m never going to install Chrome on iOS, stop asking!

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

#576

Post by jacksmith21006 »

mattigames wrote: post #533
MBCook wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Apple pre-installs it on Apple’s phones. Apple can do whatever they want on Apple phones. Google is forcing installations on Samsung phones, LG phones, etc through their contract. It is entirely possible what Apple is doing would be illegal IF they licensed/sold the OS to other OEMs.

Yeah, what Google is learning here is that you should never license your OS/sell to other manufacturers and never make it open-source and just go the Apple route instead, create the device yourself and make the OS completely proprietary and closed.

Exactly. The EU is going to force Google to do stuff that hurts the consumer not helps. Just hope Google limits it to the EU and let's us in the US continue with a great deal that Google offers.

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

#577

Post by [deleted] »

maym86 wrote: post #495

This is a case of breaking a law where there was clear precedent set by the Microsoft case. Google decided it could get away with it or the cost was worth it. I'm glad the EU stands up to monopolistic practices and doesn't capitulate like in the US. Without large companies suppressing competition who knows how many other choices and products we would have?

[deleted]

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

#578

Post by jhasse »

endorphone wrote: post #565
jhasse wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are clearly related as a suite of applications which form the core experience of what is called “Android”. I'm using Android every day and never once opened Chrome (instead I'm using the Lightning browser) or used the Google app to search (I'm just searching directly in my browser). So IMHO that's definitely NOT the core experience of Android, while the Play Store is.

Neat. So the OS allowed you to choose alternatives and to avoid Chrome wholly. So you're fully of the opinion that the EU argument has no merit then, right? Of course, saying it's a part of the Android/Google Experience is from the average consumer. You know that you have the Chrome browser if you so choose. Yes, you can go to the Play Store and install Firefox. Unlike on iOS where the browser alternatives are facade…

It's the same argument as with Microsoft vs. the EU regarding IE: Defaults are important when you have a monopoly.

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

#579

Post by swebs »

bunderbunder wrote: post #557
swebs wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other main difference it that the EU is punishing Google, while turning a blind eye to Microsoft's behavior. They were only fined for bundling IE and WMP with their OS. Locking customers out of competing operating systems is much more harmful in my opinion. The only EU mention of Windows bundling I can find is an Italian court ordering that customers should be able to get a refund for the Windows tax.

I'd say that, in this day and age, preventing vendors from using Android forks counts as a form of locking customers out of competing operating systems. Even more so now that Android forks represent the only serious alternative available to any phone manufacturer who isn't based in Cupertino. Also, two wrongs don't make a right. Microsoft getting off way too easy does not mean that Google should get off easy, too.

I meant locking out competing OSs is worse than bundling a browser with your OS. Both companies deserve the fine.

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

#580

Post by nojvek »

LamaOfRuin wrote: post #546
_khau wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time a US company is fined there are people that claim it is all protectionism and punishment with nothing to back it up (ironic, considering the degree of protectionism the US engages in). They are just sour that their precious tech companies are being brought to task for behaving like shitty house guests by not following the rules. These companies might be able to get away with whatever the hell they please b…

I have no problem with the result, or the punitive nature of it. I do think that basing fine calculations for violations of EU law on global revenue is a problematic precedent (though if it was based on EU revenue it would absolutely have to have a fair amount of latitude in calculation to avoid all the same tax dodges already in use).

I think 4.3 is a reasonable number even for EU revenue.

American multinational tech companies suck a ridiculous amount of money from the rest of the world.

The US would rarely do anything to harm their corporations. The latest govt is literally “A govt for corporations, by corporations”.

Post reply on HN