Support NeoGAF

[ClosingADoor]

They should just make a separate Google for Europe, like Google.co.uk or something

That way it would exist, but if people prefer to go to Google.com and get results like they do now, they could. I don't think it's fair to have them make changes that will affect Google outside of the EU

Because that would go down well with the EU authorities and doesn't at all seem like Google is just trying to bypass their requirements...

right I get that. I'm just saying that as an American and from the point of view of our laws this just looks like Cross-Selling, which is a standard practice of using something you have already sold someone as an entry point to sell them on another part of your business. For instance in my case I work for a worker's assistance branch of a health insurance company. We talk to our general health insurance group clients constantly to sell them on our product.

I'm not going to read the whole of EU law that the other guy posted, I'm already sure google violated it because its easy enough to understand conceptually what is being viewed as anti-trust. I just felt like pointing out the optics of it from American law.

To take your example, imagine your company is the only health insurance company in the country. And then you are constantly pushing unrelated products another department in the company also sells to your clients, while competing businesses have very limited ways to reach the clients you have. At that point the competition would get a bit unfair, doesn't it?

I can offer a better product, but I have no way to reach people, because you are the only one in the country with access to them. That prevents healthy competition and can drive up prices.

I'm actually pretty surprised it seems mostly Americans are against this ruling, since this is about giving businesses a way to growth and more competition. Something that is pretty essential for a functional free market.

I'm aware. I've been following this case for a bit. Google does have crazy advantage but I'm more laissez faire about these things.

You know that will eventually happen with Facebook and Amazon. I don't know if old school industrial revolution laws work here. That is all.

It's a classic cat and mouse game and Google has way smarter people working for it than these regulatory agencies.

It is kind of strange that between regulatory agencies that are set up to protect citizens and corporations that don't care about you, you pick the corporation and see them as "smart." I guess abusing your power is "smart" then.

 

[E92 M3]

companies should just be fined for being too big.

"Too big" is such an ambiguous term with no limitations. As someone that LOVES America, I want companies to be as successful and big as possible. If I can make money by growing my company into a multi-billion dollar corporation, then more power to me. In America, we don't punish businesses for being successful.

And please don't talk about anti-trust laws.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

I feel like 89% of the arguments against this are "But I like Google"

"Too big" is such an ambiguous term with no limitations. As someone that LOVES America, I want companies to be as successful and big as possible. If I can make money by growing my company into a multi-billion dollar corporation, then more power to me. In America, we don't punish businesses for being successful.

And please don't talk about anti-trust laws.

Ufff
The EU doesn't punish Google for being successful or big. They punish Google for trying to prevent other companies from grow. Is this that hard to understand?
Imagine if you run a business, and you do a fine job running it, but a much bigger company uses it's power to basically ruin you. Is that fair? In Europe we want more than one successful company. We want many. I'd rather have 20 big companies than 2 extremely big companies.

 

[entremet]

So basically, your entire argument is based on you not giving a single fuck.

Thanks for being honest, I guess.

To be fair, if Google does want to operate in the EU, they should follow the rules. When In Rome. So I'm not sociopathic. So either Google pulls out, which they are not, or they follow the rules. I just disagree with law myself.

 

[johancruijff]

anti-trust laws are hard

 

[Fantastapotamus]

To be fair, if Google does want to operate in the EU, they should follow the rules. When In Rome. So I'm not sociopathic. So either Google pulls out, which they are not, or they follow the rules. I just disagree with law myself.

Explain the law to me.

Edit: Nothing personal, I just want to make sure we're all on the same page. That comment read way more dick-ish than I intended.

 

[*Splinter]

The EU government has no rights to tell them what they can and can't say.

In which case Google will simply refuse to pay. Let's see if that happens.



Honestly this thread is baffling. So many people who hate having any rights whatsoever.

 

[entremet]

Explain the law to me.

I mean, it's there in the OP. The violated EU antitrust relegations by promoting their listings in search resutls over competitors. It's not rocket science, man. Again, I have no problem with Google doing that.

If you want to really get serious, just break them up honestly. They're gonna keep doing this.

But my compromise is this, they should be following EU law if they want access to that revenue. Otherwise, get out that region if you want to continue those practices.

 

[Vuze]

Jesus Christ, what's wrong with people ITT defending Google abusing their monopoly? 2,4bn is nothing to them though so I doubt they will even bother appealing.

 

[Sesuadra]

Jesus Christ, what's wrong with people ITT defending Google abusing their monopoly? 2,4bn is nothing to them though so I doubt they will even bother appealing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djzg2kd__uY ?

 

[Subpar Spatula]

This is such bullshit. This wasn't good for consumers. Google didn't push the cheapest/best service to the top, it pushed its OWN service. There could have easily been better option for you on page 4 and further down, hidden from you by Google.

The EU press release I linked above went in-depth into how this was harming consumers. Please read it.

I did read it. They don't explain in detail how Google is demoting, it's kind of assumed, really (unless I missed something), as those services appear on page four for generic searches.

It's also tricky because you can't monopolize an industry just because you're the top listing. Unless you can demonstrate otherwise, the competitors probably had a hand in their own demise.

 

[Easy_D]

I..
I......
At times i think that some people forget how companies are Made for profit and seems to be sworn paladins...

I mean, you DO know the terms for putting an image on FB? Do you know what google can do with your documents in google drive ?

I was being sarcastic lol, of course the well-being of your citizens should be held in higher regard than corporate interests

 

[Volphied]

I did read it. They don't explain in detail how Google is demoting, it's kind of assumed, really (unless I missed something), as those services appear on page four for generic searches.

You missed A LOT. From the report:

Evidence gathered

In reaching its Decision, the Commission has gathered and comprehensively analysed a broad range of evidence, including:

1) contemporary documents from both Google and other market players;

2) very significant quantities of real-world data including 5.2 Terabytes of actual search results from Google (around 1.7 billion search queries);

3) experiments and surveys, analysing in particular the impact of visibility in search results on consumer behaviour and click-through rates;

4) financial and traffic data which outline the commercial importance of visibility in Google's search results and the impact of being demoted; and

5) an extensive market investigation of customers and competitors in the markets concerned (the Commission addressed questionnaires to several hundred companies).

I assume you will continue to act like the EU just made this up until you get all 5.2 terabytes of evidence into your hands?

It's also tricky because you can't monopolize an industry just because you're the top listing. Unless you can demonstrate otherwise

But they DID monopolize it and the report detailed how this was done and the terrible effect it had on every competition.

You haven't read the report AT ALL.

 

[openrob]

That thing companies love to wiggle out of paying as best they can?

That's the one!

 

[Volphied]

I was being sarcastic lol, of course the well-being of your citizens should be held in higher regard than corporate interests

This thread is filled with people unironically arguing in favor of big corporations being allowed to fuck their customers in the ass.

Poe's law is in effect.

 

[StrategyFan]

the way the EU regulators operate is different from American notions (or misconceptions depending on your point of view) of how the law works (or how it should work)

every so often there's some story of the EU mandating something that sounds unreasonable if the same standard would be applied to any small company

many Americans don't think the concept of what is and isn't allowed should have those type of double-standards (because something is either legal or illegal, not conditionally legal), so some EU regulations seem like bullshit on paper

news headline: "EU says <big company name> can't do <thing>"
reaction: "so that means if I owned a <type of business>, I can't do <thing>? this is bullshit"

i don't fully understand it myself because i've never really seen an explanation of what type of companies have to comply with these things and which ones don't

 

[ScHlAuChi]

I read the article

It's THEIR OWN search results from their own website
The EU government has no rights to tell them what they can and can't say.

Piratebay is showing THEIR OWN search results from their own website!
The US government has no rights to tell them what they can and can't say!

Oh wait.....

 

[PnCIa]

Its scary how much power lies in the hands of few companies. The internet as a perfect free-for-all for companies needs to be stopped.
In the mid 90s, nearly no one had an idea what would be possible if "the internet" would become as ubiquitous as it is nowadays. Now it can be seen plainly, yet lawmakers are (suspiciously) slow to catch on. Doesnt help that the EU willfully put a lame duck in charge of digital affairs.

 

[NandoGip]

They're gonna just write this shit off

 

[harriet the spy]

I wish they would post documents (whether code or internal documentation) because they mention they pushed their product harder but have never produced concrete proof (which they must have, google's counter argument does not seem to revolve around this). Europe would look less like hypocrite if they actually did something serious about VW diesel scandal, but for now its crickets. Of course on both sides these organisms never have their hands completely untied.

Its scary how much power lies in the hands of few companies. The internet as a perfect free-for-all for companies needs to be stopped.
In the mid 90s, nearly no one had an idea what would be possible if "the internet" would become as ubiquitous as it is nowadays. Now it can be seen plainly, yet lawmakers are (suspiciously) slow to catch on. Doesnt help that the EU willfully put a lame duck in charge of digital affairs.

Are you suggesting the government should control the internet? Or just regulate businesses tied to its usage? (like here) Because that's scarier still. No one forces me to use google- i can go on duckduckgo if i feel, or spend my life on newsgroup, or on neogaf.

 

[Timedog]

Comments in this thread are so ridiculous that I don't even know if this is a serious post or not lol

Not a serious post

 

[Kthulhu]

Its scary how much power lies in the hands of few companies. The internet as a perfect free-for-all for companies needs to be stopped.
In the mid 90s, nearly no one had an idea what would be possible if "the internet" would become as ubiquitous as it is nowadays. Now it can be seen plainly, yet lawmakers are (suspiciously) slow to catch on. Doesnt help that the EU willfully put a lame duck in charge of digital affairs.

What are you smoking? What Google was doing was clearly in violation of the law, but this is hardly a serious crime.

 

[inner-G]

Piratebay is showing THEIR OWN search results from their own website!
The US government has no rights to tell them what they can and can't say!

I would agree with that too. My country isn't always right, either.

 

[Easy_D]

I wish they would post documents (whether code or internal documentation) because they mention they pushed their product harder but have never produced concrete proof (which they must have, google's counter argument does not seem to revolve around this). Europe would look less like hypocrite if they actually did something serious about VW diesel scandal, but for now its crickets. Of course on both sides these organisms never have their hands completely untied.



Are you suggesting the government should control the internet? Or just regulate businesses tied to its usage? (like here) Because that's scarier still. No one forces me to use google- i can go on duckduckgo if i feel, or spend my life on newsgroup, or on neogaf.

This is not a case of policing the internet though.

Edit: And yes, if a company is making a service available locally, they have to follow local laws. Which Google's been found guilty of breaking, hence a fine.

 

[PnCIa]

Are you suggesting the government should control the internet? Or just regulate businesses tied to its usage? (like here) Because that's scarier still. No one forces me to use google- i can go on duckduckgo if i feel, or spend my life on newsgroup, or on neogaf.

"The government" already controls the internet to a certain extend. The rules in place for a company like google are not nearly tight enough though, but i think lawmakers are catching on slowly.

 

[harriet the spy]

"The government" already controls the internet to a certain extend. The rules in place for a company like google are not nearly tight enough though, but i think lawmakers are catching on slowly.

No, it largely doesn't, and it really should not.

This is not a case of policing the internet though.

I agree, I wasn't talking about this

 

[Doikor]

I wish they would post documents (whether code or internal documentation) because they mention they pushed their product harder but have never produced concrete proof (which they must have, google's counter argument does not seem to revolve around this). Europe would look less like hypocrite if they actually did something serious about VW diesel scandal, but for now its crickets. Of course on both sides these organisms never have their hands completely untied.

There most likely will be. There is an investigation going on by the EU and most of the member states have their own investigations going on too. The EU governing bodies are just very slow with their decisions (and very very rarely proved wrong in the courts. EU Commission has never lost in court over antitrust cases in its whole existence which is over 40 years and hundreds have tried). Even without any additional fines by EU VW was hit hard. They lost over 1/3 of their stock value and have to fire around 30k employees over the next couple years to make up for the lost value.

The Google shopping case started in 2010 (when Foundem filed their complaint). So it took ~7 years for them to come to decision. Which is also the reason why the fine is so high (they are fining Google in proportion of the profits they made from that feature over the whole 7 years or so). Anyway google will most likely appeal and we will get some kind of a result somewhere around 2025 if they go all the way to highest court.

 

[TimmmV]

"Too big" is such an ambiguous term with no limitations. As someone that LOVES America, I want companies to be as successful and big as possible. If I can make money by growing my company into a multi-billion dollar corporation, then more power to me. In America, we don't punish businesses for being successful.

And please don't talk about anti-trust laws.

Someplace somewhere, a bald eagle sheds a single tear

 

[Dingens]

I wish they would post documents (whether code or internal documentation) because they mention they pushed their product harder but have never produced concrete proof (which they must have, google's counter argument does not seem to revolve around this). Europe would look less like hypocrite if they actually did something serious about VW diesel scandal, but for now its crickets. Of course on both sides these organisms never have their hands completely untied.[...]

It's happening, just not on gaf because it doesn't concern the US. Also completely wrong department.

Haven't read the whole thread, but I'm sure there were a few but hurt economic nationalists again complaining that the evil EU is only fining our good US companies.
Therefore, just in case I'll leave this here:

(it's mostly European companies btw. (not on the list), but if gaf is you only news source, you probably haven't heard of it...)

 

[IISANDERII]

I'm a consumer. I don't really see any benefit from VW being fined, myself. American people could care less about VW emissions, it all politics/business crap. Someone didn't bribe the right politician so they got fined.

Some government agency will probably just use the money to finance fining even more companies.

I love how these types of arguments hold conspiracy theories at their foundation. Some day you'll read your posts here and wretch in embarrassment. 100%

 

[harriet the spy]

It's happening, just not on gaf because it doesn't concern the US. Also completely wrong department.

Haven't read the whole thread, but I'm sure there were a few but hurt economic nationalists again complaining that the evil EU is only fining our good US companies.
Therefore, just in case I'll leave this here:


(it's mostly European companies btw. (not on the list), but if gaf is you only news source, you probably haven't heard of it...)

I appreciate the condescending bullshit but it's not necessary (also, I am French). I know it's not the same department, but it illustrate how difficult it is to fine companies vital to your economies interest. As for your 'it's happening', sorry, but while there is an investigation, afaik there is no consensus that something serious is going to happen. Get back to me when it does.

And I have heard that argument before - no, of course they don't just fine US companies (I do like that you provide a graph with plenty of US ones, though), accusations of bias are not uncommon (Obama did himself, though of course he represents US interests). If you think these authorities can operate in a complete political vacuum, you'd fool yourself. Make no mistake, though - the US is also far faster to jump on EU entities than its own companies (as exemplified by the fact they struggle to do anything with Google but had no issues fining VW).

 

[PnCIa]

No, it largely doesn't, and it really should not.

Laws and their enforcement are a form of control, so yes, they do. And there need to be more laws governing companies like google, before they are too big to fail.
I would rather have more control in the hands of a governing body elected (at least, somewhat elected) by the people than in the hands of a cooperation obliged to no one.

 

[harriet the spy]

Laws and their enforcement are a form of control, so yes, they do. And there need to be more laws governing companies like google, before they are too big to fail.

It's arguing semantic, but regulating businesses doing business on the internet is not controlling the internet itself (not saying that's what you advocated since your post was vague). Controlling the internet is what China or Turkey (or even the UK if you're into facesitting does). The second sentence is basically empty of content so i can't comment on it.

 

[ayeorkean]

Laws and their enforcement are a form of control, so yes, they do. And there need to be more laws governing companies like google, before they are too big to fail.
I would rather have more control in the hands of a governing body elected (at least, somewhat elected) by the people than in the hands of a cooperation obliged to no one.

Relevant driving directions and flight results within my search results, we must stop them before it's too late!

 

[PnCIa]

Relevant driving directions and flight results within my search results, we must stop them before it's too late!

Would you like to contribute something meaningfull?

 

[ClosingADoor]

I wish they would post documents (whether code or internal documentation) because they mention they pushed their product harder but have never produced concrete proof (which they must have, google's counter argument does not seem to revolve around this). Europe would look less like hypocrite if they actually did something serious about VW diesel scandal, but for now its crickets. Of course on both sides these organisms never have their hands completely untied.

They have the proof. But they can't just go around publishing Googles code or internal metrics. That would be a pretty big problem for Google if they could, because that is pretty valuable information. The important thing is, that the EU has seen the proof and ruled that is was enough to give them a fine.

As for the Diesel scandal, you have to understand the EU does not have total control over everything. A lot of that is to blame on individual countries, not the EU Commission. The EU is now charging Italy, the UK and Germany over this. And Germany itself is looking into Daimler for the same issues. So it is not true that they are doing nothing.

Relevant driving directions and flight results within my search results, we must stop them before it's too late!

The fine is for Google Shopping, not maps or flight results. Maybe they will look into that later, we don't know. But nice try. there are some links posted multiple times in the thread that explain the issue, so you might want to read those.

 

[harriet the spy]

They have the proof. But they can't just go around publishing Googles code or internal metrics. That would be a pretty big problem for Google if they could, because that is pretty valuable information. The important thing is, that the EU has seen the proof and ruled that is was enough to give them a fine.

As for the Diesel scandal, you have to understand the EU does not have total control over everything. A lot of that is to blame on individual countries, not the EU Commission. The EU is now charging Italy, the UK and Germany over this. And Germany itself is looking into Daimler for the same issues. So it is not true that they are doing nothing.


The fine is for Google Shopping, not maps or flight results. Maybe they will look into that later, we don't know. But nice try. there are some links posted multiple times in the thread that explain the issue, so you might want to read those.

Oh I agree they probably have proof - as I said, google is not trying to counter argue that even they disagree with the ruling. But out of curiosity I'd like to know what the proof was and how egregious it is.

 

[PnCIa]

It's arguing semantic, but regulating businesses doing business on the internet is not controlling the internet itself (not saying that's what you advocated since your post was vague). Controlling the internet is what China or Turkey (or even the UK if you're into facesitting does). The second sentence is basically empty of content so i can't comment on it.

I dont really know what you are going for here. Regulating internet business or social media algorithms can have far reaching implications, impacting the life of millions and potentially change what they see when they use google, or open their facebook frontpage. Germany is forcing google to filter certain results regarding national socialsm for example and are taking steps to combat fake news on facebook. Control goes beyond pulling the plug like it happens in China. Call it semantics, does not change that government influence exists and sometimes for good reason.

Oh I agree they probably have proof - as I said, google is not trying to counter argue that even they disagree with the ruling. But out of curiosity I'd like to know what the proof was and how egregious it is.

I am curious, are there instances from the past making you doubt that the proof exists (since you wrote probably) or make you doubt its quality? I am no expert on EU rulings in matter such as this, the last one i remember was that they fined Intel for over a billion.

 

[ayeorkean]

The fine is for Google Shopping, not maps or flight results. Maybe they will look into that later, we don't know. But nice try. there are some links posted multiple times in the thread that explain the issue, so you might want to read those.

Oh forgot that the google search results also have a built-in calculator, will they need a 7 year study to extort money for this too?

 

[Muffin1611]

Oh forgot that the google search results also have a built-in calculator, will they need a 7 year study to extort money for this too?

Dude, nobody cares why you love smaller companies getting fucked by Google. Stop shitposting. Stop trolling with "witty" one-liners instead of making actual arguments.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Oh forgot that the google search results also have a built-in calculator, will they need a 7 year study to extort money for this too?

What are you even talking about?

 

[finowns]

Corporations need to be massive. That way when the time comes to nationalize them, the government and the people will control all large scale industries.

You know, at least we're getting a broad spectrum of opinions in this thread..

 

[LoveCake]

Who uses Google for shopping, if I want to buy something I search on Amazon.

The issue I have always had is that the EU/UK (I am from UK) are very negative towards technology, with all the talent we are so lacking in everything in regards to technology and even entrepreneurial spirit.

The EU/UK are already miles behind the USA, Japan and China in the technology area and we are falling behind exponentially

I use Google and StartPage for searching, and I use Amazon for shopping, I do 90% of my shopping on there, it wouldn't surprise me if the EU didn't go after Amazon next.

Every company self-promotes and will always try to gain an advantage, there are also companies that pay search engines to have their site on the front page, is that fair a big company with a lot of money can out-bid a smaller company to get their name at the top of the pile?

 

[tuxfool]

The issue I have always had is that the EU/UK (I am from UK) are very negative towards technology, with all the talent we are so lacking in everything in regards to technology and even entrepreneurial spirit.

Entrepreneurial spirit has nothing to do with letting massive established monopolies run roughshod over smaller player. In anything that is precisely the issue with Antitrust.

 

[Baki]

2.7b seems absurdly excessive for something this insignificant

It's great for a company that dodges taxes.

 

[Nikodemos]

Seems a rather small sum for a colossus like Google.

 

[LoveCake]

Entrepreneurial spirit has nothing to do with letting massive established monopolies run roughshod over smaller player. In anything that is precisely the issue with Antitrust.

I agree, but why is it that there are no European players in the technology sector to rival the likes of Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, Facebook, Alibaba, Intel, Foxconn, Amazon, eBay, Paypal, Sony, Samsung and LG?

Why doesn't the EU have a company or company's that rival these, wouldn't that help combat some of these antitrust issues that the EU has put to Microsoft, Apple and Google (and others) over the years?

I have looked at the report, the one thing I have not seen though is, is there a difference between that Google does here in the EU and in the USA, Japan, Australia etc?

I do not know the answer to this, but I would be surprised if it was different, especially knowing how strict the EU is on issues like this.

I know I am looking at this from a different angle, if Google have done wrong they have done wrong and should be punished, but will anything really change, like when Microsoft were pulled up for having Internet Explorer and other software installed on Windows PC/Laptops, a Win10 PC/Laptop still comes with a load of Microsoft software installed, even my Linux Mint distro came with a load of software pre-installed like VLC player, LibreOffice and Firefox.

 

[Doikor]

I agree, but why is it that there are no European players in the technology sector to rival the likes of Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, Facebook, Alibaba, Intel, Foxconn, Amazon, eBay, Paypal, Sony, Samsung and LG?

Because our two largest economies (France and Germany) decided to double down on heavy manufacturing.

Though there is still lots of tech companies too Soundcloud, Shazam, Last.fm, Siemens, Nokia, Ericsson, Spotify, Zalando, Nginx, Rasperry Pi, Skyscanner, etc.

The thing is with how the regulation is setup it encourages competition and you rarely end up with just one big player on a field which seems to happen much more often in the rest of the world (and in the case of Korea was backed by a military dictator for Samsung, LG and friends). I mean in the US you have Paypal and Apple pay (maybe a few other) online payment companies. In EU you have like 15 different ones etc.

Also the fact that EU isn't a single country. A lot of companies can be very big in a single EU country but much smaller in others limiting their growth (vastly different cultures etc.)

Also a lot of EUs best growing tech startups have ended up being bought by a US company (Skype for example)

Why doesn't the EU have a company or company's that rival these, wouldn't that help combat some of these antitrust issues that the EU has put to Microsoft, Apple and Google (and others) over the years?

Having our own monopolies abusing their market dominance wouldn't change anything. Though having a real competitor to Google would be a great boon to everyone but I doubt there ever will be one.

 

[Occam]

A sum like this is peanuts for Google.
They should start fining these megacorps in ways that actually hurt.

 

[Syriel]

THIS IS NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT JESUS CHRIST
Can you please tell me WHY you don't agree with the ruling in actual legal terms?

Why? Because the EU press release boils down to telling Google that it cannot place ads on its own search service.

"Google Shopping" is a paid service. Sponsored links.

When you search for, say Nintendo Switch, and the box appears on the right hand side of the results page with pricing and links, it is clearly marked as sponsored.

It is the equivalent of a front page ad on a newspaper. It is blindingly obvious that it is an ad, yet the EU press release calls it a "search result."

Sponsored links and paid ads are not search results. They are ads. With the exception of the EU prosecutors, no one is confusing the two.

This is no different than telling a newspaper that it cannot place its own ads on its front page, unless it also allows other companies to sell ad space on said front page. Why should other companies have any right to sell ads there?