Slashdot Mirror
Google Could Face Heavy Antitrust Fines In the EU
SquarePixel writes "Europe's competition watchdog is considering formal proceedings against Google over antitrust complaints about the way it promotes its own services in search results, potentially exposing the company to a fine of 10 percent of its global turnover. Google is accused of using its search service to direct users to its own services and to reduce the visibility of competing websites and services. If the Commission found Google guilty of breaking E.U. competition rules, it could restrict Google's business activities in Europe and fine the company up to 10 percent of its annual global revenue (US$37.9 billion last year)."
I'm not clear as to how Google is a monopoly. It does not control the physical or electronic structure of the Internet. Web searching certainly cannot be considered a natural monopoly. It can't stop competing web services.
So how can Google maintain any kind of abusive monopoly.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Bing does this as well, I do not think it is particularly fair to start fining people for doing something that has been going on and in the open since internet searches were first born.
Now if they wanted to created some regulations to protect internet searches to make them fair, well that would be a good start.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
They have over 80% of the global search marketshare. That's what makes them a monopoly. There's nothing illegal with being a monopoly, the question is if a company is abusing that monopoly or not.
Except that nobody's forcing anybody to use Google. In fact, the real monopolist still forces every computer you buy to come with Windows and default you to Bing for searching. And they make it pretty tricky to change. I know, I know. When it works, it's pretty easy to change, but I've never actually seen anybody change the default search engine - even those that still use Google by typing www.google.com into the location bar. And I've seen cases where the search engine choice website hasn't worked at all.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
You don't even have to be a monopoly to run afowl of antitrust laws; you just have to be able to exert undue influence on market forces. Since Google has a search market share of 70%-80%, promoting their products in those searches has undue influence.
And thank God. When I type <name of store>, City, State I want a map. Not a plug for MapQuest. Not a plug for Bing. And most certainly not iOS 6 telling me I'll have to charter a kayak, and, by the way, Gander Mountain has a great deal on paddles.
A related problem: My local Wal-Mart has a Subway inside the store. Why don't you go picket them? There's clearly no way other sandwich services can compete.
DATABASE WOW WOW
In my experience, the only people who complain to the EU are competitors trying to fiddle with Googles business model. I think people who sponsor that sort of activity should attract fines of their own.
There are some interesting parallels here. Google is starting to look more and more like an operating system, with the menu bar at the top and the integration of a lot of their services into a desktop-like interface. And in a way, the "start menu" for this operating system is Google Search (it is after all the one at google.com). So the question then is, are they allowed to bundle other applications with this operating system, or should they allow others to compete with their own applications? In that sense it's similar to the whole Windows/IE bundling case. And in fact, Google could argue just like Microsoft did (although MS made some ridiculous claims about it being technically impossible to remove IE) that the embedded Maps is not a separate service at all, but that Search simply has an embedded viewer for search results that are geographical locations, which happens to be powered by the same technology as Maps.
Of course, what matters legally is the effect the thing has on the markets, not any kind of technical consideration. In that case, Google Search is a near-monopoly in the search market, and it's conceivable that its embedding of Google Maps to display results advantages Google Maps over other mapping services. I'm not sure how you would prove that (and have no idea what the standard of proof would be here), but if it turns out to be the case, then Google could remedy it by offering any other mapping services an open API that they can use to register their mapping service with Google, with Google then giving the user the option to choose a mapping service for showing embedded search results. That would be similar to the IE solution.
As for Google being evil, right now the EU is investigating if there is a crime at all. Antitrust law is a murky thing; there is no exact borderline where a market leader becomes a monopolist and where integrating services or products becomes too big a distortion of the market. So let's wait for the EU opinion first. Then, let's see how Google handles it. Will they work with the regulators to find an acceptable solution and implement it quickly, or will they try to lie, sue and lobby their way out of it like Microsoft did? I'd say that their reaction of a potential complaint constitutes a much better test of their character than just the fact that the EU has decided to investigate something.
And 1% would give everybody a monthly income of 800. And why stop there? A 25% tax would give everybody 20,000 euro a MONTH and everybody will be filthy rich and nobody will have to work ever again. You, Sir, are a genius!
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.