Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance • Hacker News Board

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#61

Post by ylere » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:48 AM UTC

gpas wrote: post #34

hulitu wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's half true, there are plenty of android auto apps on the store. The majority of them are music playing apps. Navigation apps are not allowed by google. I have 2 cars with android auto and android auto is useless for me because i cannot mirror the phone screen.

> Navigation apps are not allowed by google. They removed that restriction last April[1], now devs can publish nav, parking, charger apps etc. Sygic[2] as an example. [1] https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2021/04/start-your... [2] https://www.sygic.com/android-auto

The antitrust investigation in this case was launched in May 2019 though.

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#62

Post by benrbray » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:50 AM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #30

oblio wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walled gardens are just security theater. The App Store revenue was $72bn in 2020, yet the review time for an app is a few hours. App reviewers barely have any qualifications, they're just "call center operators" running off a script.

a) Apple has invested heavily in automated review methods over the years. b) I don't know what qualifications you think an app reviewer needs. They are not looking through the code but simply playing with the app on a range of devices. c) It is only a few hours for updates. Initial app submissions often take days/weeks and are very thorough.

> They are not looking through the code but simply playing with the app on a range of devices.

Hence, security theater.

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#63

Post by dalbasal » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:54 AM UTC

supermatt wrote: post #46

dalbasal wrote: post #26

The way antitrust is working in recent years is kind of ridiculous. Google in Europe is becoming a rich case study in antitrust meh. You find that adwords engages in a blatant "monopolistic abuse" in some specific sense. In the Adwords EU case for example, Google was both monopsonising (google search) and monopolising search advertising. But, the actual violations are specific, like exclusivity requirements and other…

Ive long held that corps should be limited to a single trade category (as per trademarks). I think that change would solve a lot of the complexities that megacorps introduce to the application of legislature.

I don't agree, but I think it's an example of rules that could be applied selectively to megacorps. Banning supermarkets from selling hot coffee, so to speak, is a problem.

It's also a problem on the megacorp scale. If Google wasn't allowed to do gmail, android and such, would we have been better off? That said, if we're only talking about a handful of megacorps, there's no need to be abstract or simple with rules. There are lots of ways to keep them in a lane.

Android, Youtube & adwords are great candidates for IPO. Why not force a float? This immediately fixes most of the issues so far demonstrated in court. It compensates AlphaGoog at market rates, preserves an incentive to innovate...

Before that though... ban mergers! Reverse merges. The whole foods acquisition is a worrying one. The "multiple" discrepancies between amazon and regular retail is so high that there's an arbitrage-like force pushing towards these acquisitions. Tesla & other auto manufacturers are a similar scenario.

Consider this... Acquiring the entire publicly traded retail sector would dilute Amazon's shares by circa 25%-50%, most of that going to Walmart and Costco. They could buy the fashion/apparel industry with petty cash. They could acquire UPS. That would make other online retailers compete with amazon like Google competes with its search partners... same logic as amazon marketplace, but more.

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#64

Post by dalbasal » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:57 AM UTC

Siira wrote: post #51

dalbasal wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

..and the last line of defense is removing a bad app to prevent further harm. Drivers licenses aren't only about competence. Sure, there's a test. But, there's also the ability to revoke a license.

So please explain why the licenses need to cost a fortune? Simple Bayesian thinking will tell you what the real motive is, and what is being used as the coverup motive.

There is no "real" motive, only history. One thing led to another. Now we are here.

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#65

Post by matsemann » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:57 AM UTC

genericacct wrote: post #56

icpmoles wrote: post #5

Quick summary: the biggest electricity provider in the country (ENEL) made an app (Juicepass) to find and manage their charging stations across the country. The Android Auto functionality of the app has been rejected by Google for non disclosed "security concerns while driving". The antitrust ruled out it was because Google wanted to sabotage competitor apps to the charging stations finder built-in in the Google Maps…

The fact that ENEL is owned by the employers of the ruling judges is just a coincidence.

Just like all judges and prosecutors are employed by the people?

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#66

Post by danuker » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:58 AM UTC

spoonjim wrote: post #36

oblio wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walled gardens are just security theater. The App Store revenue was $72bn in 2020, yet the review time for an app is a few hours. App reviewers barely have any qualifications, they're just "call center operators" running off a script.

I've watched the App Store reviewers try out apps (not in person, from logging) and they do seem to do a pretty thorough job of exercising the functionality.

How do you know those were not automated systems?

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#67

Post by carlob » Thu, May 13, 2021, 11:00 AM UTC

genericacct wrote: post #56

icpmoles wrote: post #5

Quick summary: the biggest electricity provider in the country (ENEL) made an app (Juicepass) to find and manage their charging stations across the country. The Android Auto functionality of the app has been rejected by Google for non disclosed "security concerns while driving". The antitrust ruled out it was because Google wanted to sabotage competitor apps to the charging stations finder built-in in the Google Maps…

The fact that ENEL is owned by the employers of the ruling judges is just a coincidence.

ENEL has been privatized a long time ago and the Italian government has just a plurality stake.

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#68

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 13, 2021, 11:01 AM UTC

icpmoles wrote: post #5

Quick summary: the biggest electricity provider in the country (ENEL) made an app (Juicepass) to find and manage their charging stations across the country. The Android Auto functionality of the app has been rejected by Google for non disclosed "security concerns while driving". The antitrust ruled out it was because Google wanted to sabotage competitor apps to the charging stations finder built-in in the Google Maps…

[deleted]

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#69

Post by cosmodisk » Thu, May 13, 2021, 11:01 AM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #30

oblio wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walled gardens are just security theater. The App Store revenue was $72bn in 2020, yet the review time for an app is a few hours. App reviewers barely have any qualifications, they're just "call center operators" running off a script.

a) Apple has invested heavily in automated review methods over the years. b) I don't know what qualifications you think an app reviewer needs. They are not looking through the code but simply playing with the app on a range of devices. c) It is only a few hours for updates. Initial app submissions often take days/weeks and are very thorough.

Meanwhile this is what Salesforce does for their AppExchange applicants:

https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.packagingG....

[Edit] I should add that an annual listing is $150 and the initial security review is $2550, so no free cheese either.

Re: Google fined €100M by Italian antitrust over Google Play abuse of dominance

#70

Post by PaulHoule » Thu, May 13, 2021, 11:01 AM UTC

They should fine Google Play for something that's wrong with it -- like adding icons for "Google Play Music" and "Google Play Books" just to distract you, waste your time, weaken your mind, and either get you click on an ad.

Somehow I have the hardest time finding (i) the real Google Play (app store) and (ii) the search form for apps (Google doesn't want you to search for an app and install it, they'd like to hit your brain with an electromagnetic pulse when you visit the app store and stare at mindless ads with your tongue hanging out the site of your mouth for hours. That is, the strength of the "platform" doesn't matter, just the perception of investors that Google products are still stuffed with ads, the king is on the throne, and such...)