4 ms·
tldr; Cool... but shouldn't google stop policing the internet and abusing, what some might call, monopoly powers for trivial gains. ====== I'd be willing to b
by rubyn00bie 11y ago
tldr; Cool... but shouldn't google stop policing the internet and abusing, what some might call, monopoly powers for trivial gains.
======
I'd be willing to bet, this will one day be in an FTC/DOJ report about monopoly practices at Google...
Google seems to have forgotten they don't want to be looked at as a monopoly or abusing their power for the small things. While this is consumer friendly, at least at first glance, I still find it anti-competitive and generally worthless exertion of their near monopoly power.
It also effects them quite heavily (GMail being my prime example). If I had to guess, this is a decision by someone who is lacking the resources to fully grasp the decision and potential long term ramifications of their action. Maybe they do, but for a company of their size this seems petty.
The potential anti-trust lawsuit however will not be petty.
- markdown 11y agoThis is like a television service provider pledging to give their customers (who want high quality tv shows) more high quality tv shows and less shitty shows.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y agoThis isn't an anti-trust issue. Google's not using its market dominance to move into a new market. It's more like a common practice by retailers: using their market share to force changes by their suppliers. For example, Tesco (the largest UK supermarket) recently banned certain sugary drinks targeted at children.
- kuschku 11y agoBut Google is, even today still using these same interstitial ads for Gmail. That means it will most likely end up in some antitrust trial.
- dragonwriter 11y agoOr Google will stop doing it before it starts applying the penalty. Or Google Search will penalize other Google sites that use those ads. It wouldn't be the first time Google-owned sites have run afoul of Google Search penalties.