Slashdot Mirror
EU Offers Google Chance To Settle Prior To Anti-Trust Enquiry
Fluffeh writes "The EU has accused Google of abusing its dominant position in advertising to benefit its own advertising services at the expense of competitors. In a twist however, rather than initiating formal proceedings, the EU has given Google a chance to settle the whole matter without much fuss. They outlined four changes that Google can make that will put it firmly back in the good graces of the EU. Google has been given 'a matter of weeks' to propose remedies to the four issues — which all tie in with how search results are displayed, their format and their portability to other platforms. This matter has come before the EU based on complaints by a few small companies and Microsoft."
The four issues: Displaying results to their own services specially, use of user reviews from other sites in search results, Advertising "...agreements result in de facto exclusivity requiring them to obtain all or most of their requirements of search advertisements from Google," and concerns that Google is imposing "...contractual restrictions on software developers which prevent them from offering tools that allow the seamless transfer of search advertising campaigns across AdWords and other platforms..."
This is actually what most people commenting on Google's antitrust issues miss. The comments about how easy it is for people to change search engines is not relevant because it isn't even the issue. They cannot see forest from the trees.
Google's antitrust issues are not about the everyday user. Remember, you are not their customer. You are their product. The antitrust issues are about abuse towards other companies, ad networks and services. You may not care about this if you're selfish and just think about yourself, but the issue is very real.
Google is intentionally abusing their position to promote their own products and hide competitors. Yes, this thing matters. And not only are they promoting their own services over competitors, much of the data they use is scraped off those services. Great example is hotel, restaurant etc reviews on Google Maps. They are all taken from competitors services, and promoted way higher than those services in google search results. Google prohibits these things for other websites and penalizes them, but yet seem perfectly fine to do it themselves.
Another case in point is the exclusivity agreement in AdWords. If you want to use AdWords (and you often have to because it's the prominent player and they also own Doubleclick since long time ago), you cannot run your ads on competitors services. It is prohibited in the terms. That is just monopoly abuse.
That said, "slight" might be worth millions to Google / its competitors, especially as smaller firms have complained as well as Microsoft.
What would the EU do if Google didn't want to negotiate. Block google? Many more users would be upset than have complained i'd say.
The article linked to doesn't use the word "settle" ... which is usually used in a US context for cases where the government lets a firm that has broken the law pay a bribe instead of going to court ("no admission of guilt", etc, etc).
Google currently has 66% of the search market... Interesting that Microsoft is arguing that 66% market share amounts to a dominant, monopolisitic amount that puts Google into anti-trust territory. I wonder what market share Windows and Office currently have, and if Microsoft would accept that they have a monopoly there?
First, the EU begins their second assertion by not being sure. Are they serious? Emphasis is mine:
Our second concern relates to the way Google copies content from competing vertical search services and uses it in its own offerings. Google may be copying original material from the websites of its competitors such as user reviews and using that material on its own sites without their prior authorisation.
Then they base their next point on this unsubstantiated assertion...again, bold is mine.
In this way they are appropriating the benefits of the investments of competitors.
To make matters worse, they conflate the two issues to emphasize another point, this time focusing on the possibility. Again, emphasis mine.
We are worried that this could reduce competitors' incentives to invest in the creation of original content for the benefit of internet users. This practice may impact for instance travel sites or sites providing restaurant guides...
Here is the question:
Was any investigation done? Doesn't sound like it!
What this means is that Microsoft, having failed to compete in the marketplace, now attempts to compete via the courtroom.
Google is intentionally abusing their position to promote their own products and hide competitors. Yes, this thing matters.
LMFTFY:
Google is intentionally abusing their position to improve the overall user experience. Yes, this thing matters.
There, that's better.
When I do a search from JFK to LAX, guess what - it is NICE that Google immediately knows that I am interested in a flight and shows me prices. It is NICE that they will show me a map and photos of my destination. It reduces the number of clicks and get gets me what I want faster. The same can be said for all of Google's optimized in-line services. Furthermore, I have never in my life ever heard of evidence showing that Google actually hides the result of a competitor... do you have any evidence to back that up (that is not already refuted)?
Google is very upfront about everything they do, and there are ample other search engines you can use as a user, and that people can advertise on as well.
I have been commenting about this for many times now.
In the end it is easy.... Google is no more google, it lost everything it was standing for just before it went into china and their market.
I worked theree for over 4 years inside the datacenters, I knew streetview excuses were bullshit (that they didn't know and it was a mistake) and all that + a bag of chips.
In the end it is really easy..... evil gets away cause of ignorant all knowing selfish minds (read comments and those on previous issues).
In the end it is really simple..... Everyone thinks google is great and has not much harm ment. While the other end of this is much more accurate and real for current time and situation. So as long as people keeo their head up their ass the light will not be seen! :)
Short story: Google may be using their corporate size to create a monopoly but no-one has checked. Former top-dogs Microsoft and friends are whining that (business) life isn't fair.
Nothing to see here. Move along, now.
GREECE
Entertaining isn't it. Not long since the their competitors were bitching about Googles own and paid results not being conspicuously enough marked. Google changed that and it didn't magically drive business to the complainers. Now the same leeches have told the EU that marking them conspicuously gives Google an unfair advantage!
After wading through 400 pages of self serving complaints from Microsoft fronts and ineffective businesses it seems the EU aren't really convinced they need to leap into action. 2 vague 'it's unfair' claims they've basically asked Google to justify, discredit or promise not to do, 2 contractual limitations they need to remove that probably won't noticeably affect their business.
The complainants still can't accept that they have to fight for market share by being good at what they do, that they're failing all by themselves.
They didn't stablish any fact yet. That happens during the trial, and they are trying to get into an agreement to avoid the trial.
Rethinking email
The EU is always seeking to make the users' experience less. I'm sick of all this antitrust bullshit. You could tell me all day that my search results are biased and you know what, I don't give a flying fuck because I'm finding EXACTLY WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR. And as for all the ads? How many people actually even glance at ads on the internet, let alone click on the stupid things. Big fucking deal. I don't watch commercials on TV at home because I already pay out the ass to have TV service at all. I won't look at internet ads for the same reason (in addition to the fact I am not surfing to read ads and if you are, you're an idiot). I pick up a magazine or a newspaper, I read ARTICLES, I don't read the ads, and I am willing to bet that the majority of people are in the same boat as me. Yes, what I am saying pretty much sucks if you are in the advertising business... get a real job. Something productive.
It would put a big smile on my face if Google and MS were to announce they are totally pulling out of EU markets due to all the bullshit and enormous fines. Let the EU use another OS, browser and search engine. Fuck 'em!
When MS bundles things together slashdot is all "OMG EVIL! THEY'RE CRUSHING THE COMPETITION!"
When Google bundles things together slashdot is all "What's the problem?"
Basically the EU has absolute power to fine Google whenever they want for any reason they want. Whenever they feel like extorting a little free money they'll keep going back to the well with what ever sham excuse they want.
Runnin around tryin to be Apple... runnin around tryin to be Sony/Nintendo... runnin around tryin to be Google.
If you ask me, the company is way over-diversified.
The EU has accused Google of competing in business. Competitors Cry Foul!
Seriously, no is forcing people to use Google or their services. Bing keeps hijacking my browser, but that is fair in the interest of competition. EU is looking to cash in on whatever they can to save their floundering economic value.
The EU is not forced to use Gooogle. What adverts google want to display on their product is up ti them. Maybe the EU should use bing then...