Slashdot Mirror
Google Experiences EU Antitrust Friction Over Doubleclick
An anonymous reader writes "Here in the US, the Google purchase of Doubleclick is old news. Despite a few hiccups, the news of April and May seems well in the past. In the European Union, though, the discussion begins anew again as Google seeks permission from EU antitrust regulators. From the article: 'The European Commission said it had set a review deadline of October 26, when it could approve the deal, give a two-week extension or open an in-depth, four-month investigation ... The Commission has already sent questionnaires asking competitors and customers what they think about the deal. Google has already filed with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and with the Australian competition regulator.'"
Is there any reason why they would say anything other than "this will hurt us competitively"? It only makes business sense to prevent Google from acquiring whenever you can. This seems equivalent to the FCC asking the telecoms how they feel about Google buying/leasing some airwaves.
"There is no real right or wrong, just what the majority accepts at the time."
I could set-up my own ad sense / double click service right now at cheaper rates then Google offers and there is nothing they could do to stop me.
One hopes such spotlights (or prospects thereof) will help deter Google from the temptations of the dark side... I'm sure those who remember using Google when it first came out simply to find better image galleries would like to still believe in the "we're not evil" tagline ;D.
The European Commission said it had set a review deadline of October 26, when it could approve the deal, give a two-week extension or open an in-depth, four-month investigation
It's not friction unless the EU doesn't approve the deal on October 26. Until then, this is normal process. I would question who this "anonymous reader" who submitted the misleading headline is.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
This doesn't mean Google is anticompetitive, more like the competition is incompetent.
It isn't Google who closed EU for Yahoo, and it isn't Google who set M$'s business plan.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
What is getting out of hand?
The EU has never stated they have a problem with this purchase, they are only investigating as is their duty to keep business in it's jurisdiction fair.
Monopolies and similar have always hurt people.
In this particular case (the result of Google+Double Click) it's maybe not directly disadvantageous for the regular consumer but it's potentially a problem for companies depending on internet advertising.
And due to their sheer size they might make competition al but impossible.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
No.
I was going to argue with you, but I clicked your website (to see what country you're in). I don't want to argue any more; you're hot, wear black and have similar musical taste to me.
:-)
(Well, anyway: the EU is helping startups here, by allowing fairer competition and reducing the likelihood of a single company excluding small businesses from the market. They seem to give grants to small businesses as well.)
Wow so people can succeed, but only so far. Are you a communist by any chance?
Using openSUSE instead of Windows since 9th of October, 2007 and liking it.
Yes - the EU fines lots of companies regardless of where they're based. Just because the DOJ has no bollocks, doesn't mean everyone else has to roll over for big companies.
"It doesn't cost enough, and it makes too much sense."
Does that mean Google has to ask every country whether or not if it approves the buyout... or just the pain in the arse ones?
What's the fuss about anyway?
So Google buy Double-Click. What for?
Isn't a piece of spyware anyway? At least Google is using it that way. I can't really see a difference between a company forcing targetted results onto unsuspecting netters.
Just my rant. Sorry.
Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
I recall two big Scandinavian dairies merge... The Danish competition authorizes spend a long time before allowing the deal... There's many examples, many are handled by the different national competition authorities...
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Oh yes! Look up the Volvo-Scania case, for instance. And that's just one example of many.
I wonder why Americans always become so defensive when an US firm is has to deal with non-US policy makers. No, the rest of the world is not out to get you.
Linux user since early January 1992.
Thank you for demonstrating the fact that you have no clue! Well done!
If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
Hey, this headline isn't exciting at all! I mean, why do you think I come to Slashdot in the first place, if not for the sensationalism?? Well, to be sure, the headline spuriously adds this thing about "friction" just because the EU says, "Okay, we'll check out this Google purchase of Doubleclick and will tell you next month whether there might be problems," but "experiences friction" just doesn't have the same punchy feel to it.
After all, when a police bring in the apparent sender of a bomb threat and release him after a few hours, Slashdot says, "Innocent man incarcerated for running Tor server!" And when a game counterfeiter gets arrested, the headline says, "All he did was mod the console and he got arrested!"
The Slashdot staff should do a better job here. The headline should say something like, "EU attacks Google with Doubleclick review." Or, for an even better effect, use the Cavuto mark, as in: "EU reviews Doubleclick. Will Google collapse ? "
Yeesh, without these sensationalist headlines, how is Slashdot going to gain ad revenue by attracting more readers who use Firefox and Adblock Plus?
404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
[GPG key in journal]
Or postmortem's a moron.
Since when was expressing my personal opinion trolling :(
i know not what weapons the next world war will be fought with, but world war IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
That would explain why the EU only ever investigates foreign companies...
Oh wait, what's that? they investigate Foreign and EU companies.. Oh
The US investigates US and foreign companies for this kind of behaviour too?
Oh and the commission is to ensure that *customers* don't get a poor deal? its not about promoting one company over another?
My god, how can we live with this horrible intrusion into the free market, which only effects all companies?
Wait a minute - how come you didn't complain when VW or SAS or Maersk Air, or Hoechst AG, or Peaugot were fined? See what a 2 minute web search can do? That's from a single page, all in one year, take a look at the EU website and see how many fines have been issued against EU and foreign companies. Whilst you are at it, take a look at how many companies have been investigated, because at the end of the day, all that is happening is that a deal that Google has put together that clearly *does* change the on-line advertising market, the EU wants to make sure that that change will not be detrimental to consumers. Hardly a protectionist and anti-American attack (OR should I say that it is not commercial-terrorism?). The EU *is* in part there to encourage and grow EU business, it is also there to protect its own internal market (see the tariffs and penalties imposed against foreign nations, in the same way as they are imposed on the EU), and if it didn't exist Google would be facing investigations not by one commission, but by the individual bodies of each of the current member states (I'm sure some are investigating anyway).
I'm sick and tired of US bashing in the EU and EU bashing from the US. Much of what is discussed in the media in terms of economics is nothing short of propaganda (Although I must say that the US is better at propaganda, or maybe European's are better at seeing through it), see what we have had recently with china, or the reaction in the UK to the US sub prime credit collapse.
If people could put aside their national bias for a day, we might be able to make this free-market globalisation thing work, but that is not likely, instead we will take taxpayers money and use it to prop up ailing businesses (as if they have a *right* to survive) or use it to prevent others from entering our markets. That's the US and Europe (and much of the rest of the world). Either practice capitalism, or scrap it and work out a way of organising an economy that benefits the citizens of the world rather than a few mega-corporations.
Bit of a rant, but come on, this is so far a non story, for the EU it is the sensible thing to do, it s not anti-American, it is ensuring that the consumer (thats me and you) get a good deal.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
*since bbs ;p
i know not what weapons the next world war will be fought with, but world war IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
Yes but they're buying the only viable competitor and that could make Google the only choice in the market, granting them a monopoly.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
That is not a monopoly. There is nothing stopping anybody from creating a brand new business generating ads like Doubleclick. Only governments and thugs get in the way of new business/innovation from occurring (yes I'm referring to the EU Commision).
-> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
Microsoft isn't a monopoly either then. The laws trigger on someone taking the majority of the market, not the whole market because otherwise a company could keep a puppet competitor around to avoid monopoly status and because one company holding the vast majority of the market is bad enough already.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Yes, Few years ago, the EU didn't approve a merger between two big French industrial industries.
Schneider and Legrand. Schneider lost billions in this affair (If I remember well, they had to resell shares of something). But the EU court voted in favor of Schneider and the EU had to compensate a part of this loss.
http://www.arcweb.com/txtlstvw.aspx?LstID=2a4b621b-e581-471b-9f78-98c4f01409c6
There are others like France Telecom forced to resell a subsidiary in Belgium. Merger in Austria forbidden, and plenty of others cases that don't interest US citizens. You only see the top of the Iceberg.
I really do think that it is good that the EU keeps an eye on the free market. Monopolies are a natural tendency of companies. They are not good for a vibrant free market, full of competitions, innovations and fair prices. And this example shows you that the decision may be overruled too.