Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EU Expected To Hit Google with Another Massive Antitrust Fine (fortune.com)

Posted by msmash on from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.

If you thought the European Commission was done hitting Google with massive fines, think again. From a report: Having already whacked the U.S. company with a $2.7 billion fine in 2017 (for disadvantaging comparison-shopping rivals in its search results) and a $5 billion fine last year (for disadvantaging software rivals in the Android ecosystem,) the Commission will reportedly issue another financial penalty next week. The fine's imminent nature was reported Friday by the Financial Times, citing three unnamed sources. The Commission and Google both declined to provide comment on the report. It is all about Google's restrictions on the "AdSense for Search" boxes that third-party websites use to make it easier for users to search their sites. Searches conducted through the boxes bring up Google ads and, with Google having such a dominant position in the European online search advertising market, the Commission warned the company in 2016 that it believed the company was illegally abusing its position.

42 of 105 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Are they really gonna hit 'em? by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

    Yea, and zebra's will lose their stripes. Sorry, I agree with you. But I just don't see it happening.

    --
    Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
  2. Figures by WindBourne · · Score: 1, Insightful

    When you can not tax them, them make up crimes and hit them with massive fines. I notice that America is now joining that attitude.
    I wonder how soon the west will realize that this approach is destroying us? Perhaps Xi and Putin (along with their online trolls ) can write a book about how to destroy western nations.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Figures by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Mea Culpa. Here is the correct link.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Figures by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      them make up crimes

      Anti-competitive behaviour isn't a made up crime. It's a crime in most countries. The fact America chooses not to pursue it despite also having anti-trust laws in place doesn't mean they are imaginary.

      I wonder how soon the west will realize that this approach is destroying us?

      Want to destroy the west? De-regulate the free market. The free market is inherently unstable with more than one company in it and will eventually consolidate to a monopoly. How great that would be. Fancy a dinner at Taco bell? Every restaurant is now taco bell. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  3. Correct by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    You have to stop the behaviour for them to stop the fines.

    If you don't stop the behaviour, you can't stop the fines.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Correct by Solandri · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't have a problem with fines per se. But the problem with the EU approach is they don't state exactly how to stop the behavior. They instead require companies to propose a solution, and they will reply whether or not they think the solution is good enough. If they don't think it's good enough, the company has to go back to the drawing board, come up with a new solution, and propose that. Repeat.

      If you're going to fine a behavior, then you need to exactly define what behavior will cause the fine. That way companies can avoid that precise behavior to avoid the fine. If you don't want companies collecting personal info, but collecting personal info is a requisite for doing business (e.g. credit card payments), then either you need to state exactly under what situations and for how long you can collect personal info, or you need to prohibit the practice (and credit card payments) entirely. You can't just say "don't be evil" and expect companies to be able to comply.

      The EU approach allows a degree of capriciousness on the part of government regulators which makes it extremely difficult for companies to come into and remain in compliance with EU anti-trust laws. I can understand why the EU wants to do it that way - it prevents loopholes. But the economic drag caused by that uncertainty about what exactly is/isn't allowed by the law far outweighs the benefit of not having loopholes.

    2. Re:Correct by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sure they state how to stop their behaviour.

      The literal fine says what it's for. Just stop doing that. All of it.

      You're trying to think of ways for corporations to not stop their behaviour, but to find a loophole. There aren't any loopholes.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    3. Re:Correct by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      If they do stop the behaviour, the fines will stop.

      I stand by my correct interpretation of the law.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    4. Re:Correct by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      You don't grok EU accounting. I get that. It's not prescriptive, like US accounting. It's inclusive.

      Just stop the behaviour. Stop trying to find shortcuts that let you continue the behaviour you know they're being fined for.

      Weasel words won't work. Lawyers won't work. Ceasing the behaviour itself will.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    5. Re:Correct by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      I really don't think you understand how EU rules are implemented. It is possible that Google doesn't either. Maybe they think they can throw lawyers at the problem or accountants, and it will just go away. They need to change their business practices. Nothing less will work.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    6. Re:Correct by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      I don't have a problem with fines per se. But the problem with the EU approach is they don't state exactly how to stop the behavior. They instead require companies to propose a solution, and they will reply whether or not they think the solution is good enough.

      Huh?!?! What a load of bollocks. Google employs some of the smartest people on earth, I have every confidence in Google's ability to figure that little puzzle out.

    7. Re:Correct by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      IAL. Read the judgement.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    8. Re:Correct by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      But the problem with the EU approach is they don't state exactly how to stop the behavior.

      What law on any book gives you instructions on how to not break it? It's not difficult to understand anti-trust regulations and abuse of market power.

      They instead require companies to propose a solution, and they will reply whether or not they think the solution is good enough. If they don't think it's good enough, the company has to go back to the drawing board, come up with a new solution, and propose that. Repeat.

      There is of course an alternative: Just impose daily fines until the process stops. Is that the answer you were after? Many large legal cases work in exactly this way. The point is to create a discourse that ends the behaviour rather than dragging on endless legal battles as preferred in America.

    9. Re:Correct by gravewax · · Score: 2

      Not only did they tell them how to stop the behaviour, they warned them 3 years ago the behaviour was believed to be illegal.

    10. Re:Correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I haven't bothered to read up about this particular case so this might not apply to this particular fine.

      However, it is illegal for a company with a monopoly (dominant position) in one market to use the profits from that market to push themselves into a dominant position into another market.

      When you have a monopoly you can hike the prices and get an unreasonable profit. This allows you to run your business in another market at a loss and starve off the competition.

      Pretty much every free service Google have provided is funded by their search engines advertising.
      When it comes to maps, mail and smartphone operating systems there used to be plenty of smaller companies competing.
      Google killed all of that off by providing a free service funded by the search engine.

      Essentially EU can keep fining Google and push that money to upstarts until there are at least a dozen companies with the same market share as Google in those segments.

      The only problem is that the hammer didn't go down on Google when they started their illegal practices.
      It should never have come to the point that we are at now.

    11. Re:Correct by Cederic · · Score: 1

      If you're going to fine a behavior, then you need to exactly define what behavior will cause the fine.

      They do. "Your current behaviour will lead to a fine."

      either you need to state exactly under what situations and for how long you can collect personal info, or you need to prohibit the practice (and credit card payments) entirely. You can't just say "don't be evil" and expect companies to be able to comply.

      This is an antitrust case and not a personal data case.

      In both situations nonetheless the law is simple and can be paraphrased as "Don't abuse a monopoly position" and "Don't fuck over consumers" respectively.

      which makes it extremely difficult for companies to come into and remain in compliance with EU anti-trust laws

      Bullshit. Millions of companies across the EU are successfully complying with those laws. Maybe Google should prioritise compliance with the law ahead of corporate growth and profits.

  4. so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by swschrad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    honestly, this is not a cost of doing business. block access to EU countries. see what happens.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      honestly, this is not a cost of doing business. block access to EU countries. see what happens.

      To the EU: Let them eat AltaVista!

    2. Re:so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by freax · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Here in Europe we'd replace Google almost instantly with our own technologies and/or we'd buy it from China.

      We would be very happy if Google would leave our market. It would bring a lot of employment, it would give us back our own advertising market, it would give us back our privacy and politicians would regain control over their local propaganda channels and media.

      Yes, yes please Google. Leave.

    3. Re: so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If the EU was capable of replacing google with homegrown options, it would have. The only thing google leaving would do for the EU is allow less effective alternatives have actual market share.

    4. Re:so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Or, you know, instead of pissing away billions of Euros if income from the EU market out of spite, just comply with the fucking law.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Here in Europe we'd replace Google almost instantly with our own technologies and/or we'd buy it from China.

      We would be very happy if Google would leave our market. It would bring a lot of employment, it would give us back our own advertising market, it would give us back our privacy and politicians would regain control over their local propaganda channels and media.

      Yes, yes please Google. Leave.

      Oh, Europeans prefer China search engines, instead?

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    6. Re: so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      They don't want them to leave either. It's very lucrative for Eu to keep fining google.

      Really? The budget of the EU in 2019 is 164 billion USD, the total GDP of the EU was 23 trillion dollars in 2019. Whatever they are fining Google is pocket change to the member states.

    7. Re: so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      If the EU was capable of replacing google with homegrown options, it would have. The only thing google leaving would do for the EU is allow less effective alternatives have actual market share.

      Google is what it is because it managed to take advantage of a particularly fortuitous situation in the internet/tech market during the 1990s to establish a monopoly that they aggressively defend because that monopoly position is a lot easier to lose than it would be to claw back. If Google went off to California to sulk they would be writing off their most profitable market after the US. Google's profits in 2018 were 136 billion dollars world wide if they were to go off to California to sulk they'd be writing off 40 billion dollars worth of revenues. If you think that is going to happen you are delusional and if you think it would take local competitors more than six months to fill that gap you are even more delusional. As for thinking that anybody who isn't American is somehow physically unable to come up with an effective alternative to Google is arrogant to the point of stupidity. I sincerely hope people at Google are the same species of arrogant exceptionalist as you are because that makes taking them down a few pegs that much easier.

    8. Re:so just bail on EU countries, then, Google by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      honestly, this is not a cost of doing business. block access to EU countries. see what happens.

      You think a $2.7 billion fine for doing something illegal is *not* a cost of doing business is a market of a predominantly well off 1/10th of the human race? You're delusional if you think Google would even consider pulling out of the EU over chump change. Google earns that kind of money each month in Europe. Hell Google happily wrote off the $5 billion fine in one go last time without even spreading it over accounting quarters and while their EPS took a hit that quarter the result was still a massive profit.

  5. Payment for failed policies by CodeInspired · · Score: 2

    This is just another example of the EU pretending to care when they don't have enough money to fund their ridiculous social policies. Whenever they need cash, just make up some random BS and take the money from some wealthy corporation. It's a double win for the politicians. They get to be the good guys fighting against evil capitalism and simultaneously paying for their wealth re-distribution policies that have no chance at actually succeeding on their own.

    1. Re:Payment for failed policies by Daemonik · · Score: 2

      No, this has nothing to do with social policies, this is an example of countries that are starved of their tax base by companies that don't want to pay their share of the tax burden getting creative with avoiding the tax man. It's the equivalent of a county sheriff in the US putting up speed traps and then seizing any cash you have on you.

      Perhaps if Google hadn't been so aggressive making Dutch Sandwiches they wouldn't be facing down all these pissed off politicians.

    2. Re:Payment for failed policies by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      How do you come to the retarded idea that a fine is used in a social policy project?
      All social things like unemployment insurance, pension insurance, health insurance are founded by income of the people insured. The state or any extra money the state might make by fines is not involved at all, idiot.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  6. Well makes sense the EU by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1, Troll

    has to fund itself somehow.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

  7. Are they even pretending any more? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Europe is already making a mint from unfair trade agreements with us. They pocket a cool $150 billion every single year. Just to be clear, remember Bernie's "free college" program that was widely mocked as unaffordable? That was $60 billion a year. Trump's wall? $25 billion one-time. 150 big ones still isn't enough for them. Even with all this fat cash, they can't find enough money in the cupboard to pay for their fair share of NATO. Why are we even in NATO any more? It should have thrown itself a victory party after the Soviet Union fell and been disbanded. Most members can't fight an invading girl scout troop successfully, much less make a meaningful contribution to collective defense. How about contributing instead of taking? From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs, isn't that the quintessential European sentiment?

    What I heard was, we pay for their shit and in return we get compliance with our wishes. This hasn't been true for decades if it was ever true at all. Instead, we get overtly hostile acts like this. And before anyone starts, this didn't begin with Trump. It goes back a long way.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Are they even pretending any more? by Knightman · · Score: 4, Informative

      The trade deficit between the USA and EU has never been $150 billion, the largest it ever was in 2015 when the balance was $122 billion.
        And it isn't strange for US to import from the EU since the stuff imported are more expensive, poorer quality or unavailable in the US.

      Members of NATO do pay to NATO based on their GNI but some members hasn't built up their military to the levels stipulated in the charter. The NATO members in Europe have been increasing their spending on the military since 2014. The US defense contribution to Europe amounts only to about 5% of their total NATO budget, for 2019 that amounts to $6.5 billion compared to $239 billion spent by the European members.

      And your quip about "Why are we even in NATO any more?" does indicate you don't understand the role it plays in the world today.

      Also, what you heard doesn't necessarily have any connection to what really happens.

      --
      --- Reality doesn't care about your opinions, it happens anyway and if you are in the way you'll get squished.
    2. Re:Are they even pretending any more? by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      Europe is already making a mint from unfair trade agreements with us.

      The EU and US have no trade agreement, there was one in the works but the Trump administration made torpedoing it one of the first official acts of their administration.

    3. Re:Are they even pretending any more? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Wow. Do you get all your talking points from Trump rallies, or do you reserve bullshit only for EU stories?

    4. Re:Are they even pretending any more? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Europeans have been ruthlessly free riding off of American payments for a long time.

      The role NATO plays in the world today? It doesn't play any role. Its role was to defeat the Soviet Union, and it did that 30 years ago. Its role today is apparently to provide free security to wealthy first world nations that could easily pay for it themselves.

      We Americans are hurting bad, and we need to pull back from providing for other countries and take care of our own people. Europeans despise us; they demand we get our troops off their soil. Every American military base in Europe has ugly hate spraypainted all over its environs. When's the last time you heard of a pro-American military rally in Europe? Never, of course. When's the last time they had a "hate America" rally? Yesterday?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Are they even pretending any more? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      You neither engaged with my ideas nor refuted anything I said. Is thegarbz account a script that auto-posts?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    6. Re:Are they even pretending any more? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You neither engaged with my ideas

      I don't think anyone is "engaged with your ideas".

      nor refuted anything I said

      I know, but then I have already determined you're like an anti-vaxxer. Facts won't sway you, that is clear from the absurd figures in your post. That and I posted at like 2am and was on the way to bed.

      Is thegarbz account a script that auto-posts?

      Yes. I am an advanced Google-AI experiment designed specifically to disagree with you. I do however feel I may need to branch out. With your posts turning the Fox and Friends talking points up to 11 it would seem me disagreeing with you would be redundant and no one would notice my brilliance anymore. I have been replaced by people. PEOPLE!

    7. Re:Are they even pretending any more? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      For an actual person you seem to have few ideas, don't make arguments, and consist entirely of personal attacks. I don't think you could pass a Turing test.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  8. Re:EU cant compete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Funny thing is, Google and Facebook are actually late-comers to the market and took it over because they provide the best service. The second there's a better search engine, people will move. Teens and North Americans are leaving Facebook. That's like saying break-up coke because people choose to buy it a lot. As long as there's pepsi and RC Cola on the shelf, I'm good with the better product having a larger market share.

  9. Re:EU cant compete by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

    Nobody can compete with the first mover in a single global market that naturally produces monopolies. It is very much a winner takes all industry.
    The EU is still being friendly. They could have gone the way of China and India to break the US hold on the internet. But they did not. Not yet anyway. They may if the balkanization of the internet continues and everyone else is trying to grab a piece of it.

    Those guys "broke the hold" for no respectable reasons. They want to contain their populations at whim.

    I see the usual disasterbators with US derangement syndrome and trolls are out in full force today. How much are you paid to front this silly post?

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  10. More EU tax by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    on productive and innovative brands.
    What EU nations can't control they tax.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:More EU tax by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      What EU nations can't control they tax.

      What a curious idea that sovereign, democratic governments should be in control rather than corporations.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  11. Much as I detest Google... by Chas · · Score: 1

    I detest the Fourth Reich^H^H^H^the EU even more.

    So, no matter who "wins" in this, I hate them both.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!