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

801–810 of 975 posts

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

#801

Post by AnthonyMouse »

Radle wrote: post #663
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a matter of proportionality. A punishment that is the economic equivalent of the destruction of a small city is proportional to something on the order of mass murder, not the prominence of certain information on a company's web page.

If a company creates damages exceeding billions of dollars, it's quite obvious that they should receive penalty worth billions of dollars. That's basic proportionality.

> If a company creates damages exceeding billions of dollars, it's quite obvious that they should receive penalty worth billions of dollars.

That is entirely tautological. It omits the reasoning under which that spectacular amount of irreparable damages have actually occurred to consumers.

"They have a lot of money and we would like to have that" is not a valid method of calculating damages.

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

#802

Post by cageface »

kerng wrote: post #799
cageface wrote: post #791

I'm having a really hard time figuring out what happy ending the EU has in mind here. Google stops licensing Android to OEMs and doubles down on Pixel. It takes them years to catch up to Apple's marking and distribution head start, if they ever do. Samsung goes back to Tizen, which nobody wants, and sales plummet. All the other Android OEMs disappear. All we have left is Apple and the most expensive, proprietary and…

How about Google just allows OEM to license without preventing them to customize as they see fit best for their customers? Or allow them to build other solutions, not forcing them to do it the Google way? Its the exact same evil business practicr Microsoft did in the 90s, surprising Google got away with it that long. But also Microsoft wasn't fined until something like 10 years later...

The key difference at that time was that Microsoft had zero real competition and was stifling innovation in the OS and web space. Instead today Android is the only alternative to the most proprietary and richest company in the history of computing, which needs no legal remedies or special favors.

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

#803

Post by pjmlp »

cageface wrote: post #800
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #795

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a realistic scenario. If Google "stopped licensing Android", most OEMs would fork it at least initiating. Additionally, if Google were to move solely into the Pixel space, it would fail, overtaken by Samsung and other OEMs which know how to run a hardware business. Apple will continue to be a niche player because they like it that way, they aren't a threat and never have been. And without the big Android b…

Who is going to use Android with no app store and a bunch of crappy bundled apps? The answer is nobody. Look how far Amazon has been able to push that with all their engineering and marketing muscle. Apple is a niche player only because they clung to their margins like a bag of heroin and let cheap Android phones eat their lunch. If it weren't for Android they would have zero serious competition. I find myself in the…

The same people that were already using J2ME and Symbian apps before iPhone became a thing.

Even Google used to have maps versions that targeted those platforms, before they went with Android.

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

#804

Post by cageface »

pergadad wrote: post #797
cageface wrote: post #791

I'm having a really hard time figuring out what happy ending the EU has in mind here. Google stops licensing Android to OEMs and doubles down on Pixel. It takes them years to catch up to Apple's marking and distribution head start, if they ever do. Samsung goes back to Tizen, which nobody wants, and sales plummet. All the other Android OEMs disappear. All we have left is Apple and the most expensive, proprietary and…

I get the impression that you didn't read the actual article. There are three complaints all basically about the contractual conditions Google imposes, two about imposing Google search and the most interesting one about Google forcing manufacturers to choose between selling only Google's version with Play Store & Google apps or never Google's version. This forced in particular the big ones to commit fully to Google's…

Why would Google continue to license Android to Samsung when it can no longer make any revenue from Samsung phones? At that point it would only make sense for them to throw all their efforts into Pixel and catch up as best they can.

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

#805

Post by bitmapbrother »

cageface wrote: post #791

I'm having a really hard time figuring out what happy ending the EU has in mind here. Google stops licensing Android to OEMs and doubles down on Pixel. It takes them years to catch up to Apple's marking and distribution head start, if they ever do. Samsung goes back to Tizen, which nobody wants, and sales plummet. All the other Android OEMs disappear. All we have left is Apple and the most expensive, proprietary and…

Google doesn't need to stop licensing GMS to OEM's. They simply need to stop giving it away for free and start charging OEM's to license it. And the OEM's that do license it will, of course, pass on the expenses to the consumer and raise the cost of the device. If the EU wants to stop Google from forcing OEM's to install their apps then congratulations you've now put OEM's in a position where they will now pay for GMS licensing and increase phone prices. Ironically, this decision will favor Google as the additional revenue from GMS licensing will allow them to decrease their dependency on search and further diversify their revenue streams. That 5 billion dollar fine will quickly be replenished with EU GMS licensing fees.

>The free distribution of the Android platform, and of Google’s suite of applications, is not only efficient for phone makers and operators—it’s of huge benefit for developers and consumers. If phone makers and mobile network operators couldn’t include our apps on their wide range of devices, it would upset the balance of the Android ecosystem. So far, the Android business model has meant that we haven't had to charge phone makers for our technology, or depend on a tightly controlled distribution model.[1]

https://www.blog.google/around-the-globe/google-europe/andro...

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

#806

Post by njoro »

DannyBee wrote: post #724
LolNoGenerics wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I can create an open platform and control how it is used? That doesn't make sense.

Err, no, they controlled only the people who chose to use their apps or play store. That's still open, you can do whatever you want, it's just if you want their stuff, you play by their rules.

I think you are twisting the definitions pretty hard. Android isn't open for anyone who also wants access to the dominant app store. If you want that and sign that agreement you can no longer effectively enjoy the right you have under e.g. the GPL and distribute devices with modified versions of the code. As I understand this is legal under the GPL, but certainly very shady towards the developers who made the code available with the intention for it be used openly, rather than being leveraged by Google for their anti-competitive means. Also those practices is preventing other developers, who has as much right to the code under the license, from using those manufacturers. This is a clear attempt of trying to use their dominant position to control the market and shut out the competition from those manufacturers, not just controlling the manufacturers themselves which would be bad enough in the first place. And that is exactly why they are being and should be fined.

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

#807

Post by cageface »

pjmlp wrote: post #803
cageface wrote: post #800

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is going to use Android with no app store and a bunch of crappy bundled apps? The answer is nobody. Look how far Amazon has been able to push that with all their engineering and marketing muscle. Apple is a niche player only because they clung to their margins like a bag of heroin and let cheap Android phones eat their lunch. If it weren't for Android they would have zero serious competition. I find myself in the…

The same people that were already using J2ME and Symbian apps before iPhone became a thing. Even Google used to have maps versions that targeted those platforms, before they went with Android.

I.E. nobody that can afford even the cheapest iPhone. The world has changed since J2ME mattered.

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

#808

Post by kerng »

cageface wrote: post #802
kerng wrote: post #799

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Google just allows OEM to license without preventing them to customize as they see fit best for their customers? Or allow them to build other solutions, not forcing them to do it the Google way? Its the exact same evil business practicr Microsoft did in the 90s, surprising Google got away with it that long. But also Microsoft wasn't fined until something like 10 years later...

The key difference at that time was that Microsoft had zero real competition and was stifling innovation in the OS and web space. Instead today Android is the only alternative to the most proprietary and richest company in the history of computing, which needs no legal remedies or special favors.

Android has something like 85-90% marketshare - not different then Windows back in the day.

Google bundling their Search with it is just pushing their own agenda.

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

#809

Post by redial »

greggman wrote: post #773
redial wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It had a monopoly on Intel based computers. No, it had a monopoly on IBM-Compatible computers, which is a category that includes multiple OEMs that sell compatible machines. Apple doesn't have a monopoly on any market category where more than 1 player (Apple) is involved.

no it didn't. see the actual ruling quote: "The District Court determined that Microsoft had maintained a monopoly in the market for Intel compatible PC operating system" https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/253...

Ok, Intel-compatible.

Apple has no monopoly on any hardware market where they are not the only one. They cannot dictate terms to any other OEM manufacturing A10-compatible computers.

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

#810

Post by pjmlp »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #683
dmix wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, I remember seeing that now on my moms laptop. I remember it was quite aggressive in warning you not to switch away from Edge. Microsoft can never let the marketing people stop having control and ruining their products. They are trying to make it more useable and user friendlier, but it's funny seeing the push back within the product.

I've recently said that Microsoft is the most self-defeating company in history. They often take all of the goodwill they've earned, and then torch it on minor battles that aren't really making them any money. If someone's gotten into the settings screen to change their default, they probably have tried Edge, or at least know what it is and have some reason for switching. Windows 10 telemetry is a great example: They…

That kind of behaviour is easy to understand when one works at any Fortune 500, specially those whose main business isn't software related.

It doesn't matter how much goodwill a specific department might have, power struggle and department differences always end up impacting it.

Post reply on HN